"Adwords" tagged Cases and Lawsuits
| Case | Case Filed | Last Document |
|---|---|---|
| Function Media, L.L.C. v. Google, Inc. et al | July 3, 2007 | November 19, 2009 |
| Plaintiff alleges that Google's AdSense and AdWords technologies, Google Print Ads, and Yahoo's Publisher and Content Match technologies infringe on its patents. | ||
| Performance Pricing, Inc. v. Google Inc. et al | September 27, 2007 | November 18, 2009 |
| Plaintiff Performance Pricing, Inc. sued Google Inc., AOL LLC, Microsoft Corporation and Yahoo! Inc. for infringing U.S. Patent No. 6,978,253 entitled "Systems and Methods for Transacting Business Over a Global Communications Network such as the Internet." | ||
| PA Advisors, LLC v. Google Inc. et al | November 2, 2007 | November 16, 2009 |
| Plaintiff PA Advisors, LLC allege that Defendants infringed no U.S. Patent No. 6,199,067 entitled "System and Method for Generating Personalized User Profiles and for Utilizing the Generated User Profiles to Perform Adaptive Internet Searches." | ||
| Almeida v. Google, Inc. | April 22, 2008 | November 13, 2009 |
| Plaintiff David Almeida alleges that Defendant Google Inc. failed to disclose that leaving the content ad CPC input blank would subject Plaintiff to charges for content ads on third party websites. | ||
| CLRB Hanson Industries, LLC et al v. Google Inc. | September 12, 2005 | November 9, 2009 |
| Plaintiffs claim that defendant Google Inc. misled AdWords advertisers by allowing advertising charges to exceed daily budgets that advertisers set for their ad campaigns. | ||
| Levitte v. Google Inc. | July 11, 2008 | October 30, 2009 |
| Plaintiff Hall K. Levitte sued Defendant Google, Inc. in regards to the Google AdWords program. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant had damaged plaintiff and the class by improperly charging them for advertising placed by Google on low-quality domain and error page websites. | ||
| Paid Search Engine Tools, LLC v. Google, Inc. et al | February 12, 2008 | October 21, 2009 |
| Plaintiff Paid Search Engine Tools, LLC alleges that Defendants Google, Inc. and Microsoft Corporation infringed on U.S. Patent No. 7,043,450 entitled "Paid Search Engine Bid Management." | ||
| Goodard v. Google, Inc. | May 30, 2008 | August 11, 2009 |
| Plaintiff Jenna Goddard alleged that she was injured when she provided her cell phone number to an allegedly fraudulent mobile subscription services website and was charged for unwanted mobile content services in the form of premium text messages. Plaintiff alleged that the fradulent subscription services website she was was a Google AdWords advertiser and absent Google's provision of AdWords services to the Fraudulent Mobile Subscription Services, Plaintiff would never have been damaged. | ||
| GraphOn Corporation v. Google Inc. | August 13, 2008 | June 5, 2009 |
| Plaintiff GraphOn Corporation alleged that Defendant Google Inc. infringed U.S. Patent Nos. 6,324,538 and 6,850,940 entitled "Automated On-Line Information Services and Directory, Particularly for the World Wide Web," and U.S. Patent Nos. 7,028,034 and 7,269,591 entitled "Method and Apparatus for Providing a Dynamically-Updating Pay-For-Service Web Site." | ||
| Bid for Position, LLC v. AOL, LLC et al | December 13, 2007 | April 27, 2009 |
| Plaintiff Bid for Position, LLC alleges that Defendants AOL, LLC, Google, Inc., Microsoft Corporation and MIVA, INc. infringed on Patent No. 7,225,151 entitled "Online Auction Bid Management System and Method." | ||
| Pulaski & Middleman, LLC v. Google Inc. | August 14, 2008 | October 31, 2008 |
| Plaintiff Pulaski & Middleman, LLC that Defendant Google Inc. breached its contract with advertisers by placing ads on AdSense for Domains and AdSense for Errors sites, as well as low-quality, illegal sites or sites that violated Google's terms of service. | ||
| JIT Packaging Inc v. Google, Inc. | August 11, 2008 | August 12, 2008 |
| Plaintiff JIT Packaging Inc. alleged that Defendant Google, Inc. concealed the fact that many of its AdWords advertisements appeared on low quality parked/non-content sites and error pages. | ||
| Mark Mishak v. Google, Inc. et al | December 20, 2007 | July 18, 2008 |
| Plaintiff Mark Mishak d/b/a INEEDATV.com alleges that Defendants have sold keywords identical to Plaintiff's trademarks--"I Need a TV"--to various third parties and have deliberately manipulated the search engine results so that when consumers use these search engines to find Plaintiff's products and services, the consumers are unwittingly diverted to competitors' products and services. | ||
| American Airlines Inc v. Google Inc | August 16, 2007 | July 17, 2008 |
| American Airlines is suing Google for allowing companies to show ads when its trademarks, including (but not limited to) "AMERICAN AIRLINES" "AMERICAN EAGLE" "AA" "A A" "AA.COM" "AMERICAN AIRLINES CENTER" "AADVANTAGE" "AMERICAN CONNECTION" "AMERICANAIRLINES" are searched on. | ||
| Feldman v. Google, Inc. | May 3, 2007 | February 28, 2008 |
| Plaintiff Lawrence Feldman purchased advertising from Defendant Google, Inc. based on keywords such as Vioxx, Bextra and Celebrex. Plaintiff alleged that he was a victim of click fraud and that 20–30% of all clicks for which he was charged was fraudulent. | ||
| Connor Sport Court International, Inc., v. Google Inc. | October 31, 2007 | November 14, 2007 |
| Movant Connor Sport Court International, Inc. seeks to compel Respondent Google, Inc. to comply with a subpoena duces tecum relating to third party use of the term "Sport Court" as an adword and Rhino Sports, Inc.'s use of the Sport Court mark and other terms as adwords. | ||
| Person v. Google Inc. | November 27, 2006 | September 19, 2007 |
| Plaintiff Carl E. Person contends that defendant Google, Inc.'s quality score analysis prevents him from purchasing keyword targeted internet advertising at the advertised minimum cost-per-click prices and discriminates against him and other small business users who are not high volume advertisers. Related case: Person v. Google, Inc. from the U.S. District Court-Southern District of New York. | ||
| CNG Financial Corporation v. Google Inc | January 24, 2006 | September 7, 2007 |
| Plaintiff CNG Financial Corporation sued Defendant Google, Inc. over Google's practice of allowing third parties to purchase online advertisements that appear when a user searches for "Check 'N Go" on Google's website. Plaintiff owns the service mark "Check 'N Go." | ||
| Google Inc. v. American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc. | November 26, 2003 | September 5, 2007 |
| Plaintiff Google Inc. seeks declaratory judgment that its policy regarding the sale of keyword-triggering advertising does not constitute trademark infringement. | ||
| Mizera v. Google | July 15, 2005 | June 26, 2007 |
| Plaintiff alleges that defendant Google Inc. has failed to take any significant measures to track or prevent click fraud, to adequately warn its customers about the existence of click fraud, to adequately advise customers that they have been victimized by click fraud, and to refund customers the excess charges that they have incurred as a result of the click fraud. | ||
| Advanced Internet Technologies, Inc. v. Google, Inc. | June 24, 2005 | June 26, 2007 |
| Plaintiff alleges that defendant Google Inc. has failed to take any significant measures to track or prevent click fraud, to adequately warn its customers about the existence of click fraud, to adequately advise customers that they have been victimized by click fraud, and to refund customers the excess charges that they have incurred as a result of the click fraud. | ||
| Langdon v. Google Inc. et al | May 17, 2006 | June 1, 2007 |
| Plaintiff Christopher Langdon complains that defendants Google, Inc., Yahoo! Inc. and Microsoft Corp. declined to accept advertising from plaintiff for his websites www.ncjusticefraud.com and www.chinaisevil.com. | ||
| LASSOFF v. GOOGLE, INC. | August 10, 2006 | May 17, 2007 |
| Plaintiff Samuel Lassoff sued defendants Google, Inc., Yahoo!, Inc. and IAC Interactive Corporation for fraud, breach of contract, negligence, unjust enrichment, and unfair business practices. Plaintiff Samuel Lassoff alleges that defendants engaged in a scheme to hide its negligent handling of plaintiff's advertising account and never warned plaintiffs of fraudulent clicks or made any recovery efforts for the plaintiffs. | ||
| FELDMAN v. GOOGLE, INC. | June 14, 2006 | April 3, 2007 |
| Plaintiff Lawrence Feldman d/b/a Lawrence Feldman & Associates alleges that he contracted with Google to purchase advertisements on the Internet, and that Google breached the contract and violated other laws by overcharging him for those ads. | ||
| Rescuecom Corporation v. Google, Inc. | September 7, 2004 | February 13, 2007 |
| Plaintiff Rescuecom Corporation alleges that defendant Google, Inc. improperly infringes on plaintiff's name and trademark by selling the trademark to plaintiff's competitors as a keyword in defendant's search results. | ||
| Person v. Google, Inc. | June 19, 2006 | October 11, 2006 |
| Plaintiff Carl E. Person contends that defendant Google, Inc.'s quality score analysis prevents him from purchasing keyword targeted internet advertising at the advertised minimum cost-per-click prices and discriminates against him and other small business users who are not high volume advertisers. Related case: Person v. Google, Inc. from the U.S. District Court-Northern District of California. | ||
| Government Employees, et al v. Google, Inc., et al | May 4, 2004 | August 8, 2005 |
| Plaintiff GEICO sued defendant Google, Inc. claiming that defendant violated the Lanham Act and engaged in unfair competition by using GEICO's trademarks to sell advertising on its Internet search engine. | ||
| Digital Envoy, Inc. v. Google, Inc. | March 29, 2004 | June 7, 2004 |
| Plaintiff Digital Envoy, Inc. alleges that it entered into a Product and Electronic Database Evaluation and License Agreement with defendant Google, Inc. under which the defendant licensed plaintiff's IP technology to obtain the geographic location of visitors to its website. However, plaintiff contends that the use of its IP technology in the Google AdSense program falls outside the scope of its agreement. | ||
| RK West, Inc. v. Google, Inc. | July 17, 2008 | |
| Plaintiff RK West, Inc. d/b/a Malibu Sales brings a class action on behalf of all persons or entities located within the United States who created an AdWords campaign an were subsequently charged for clicks for ads placed on parked domains. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Google, Inc. does not disclose the web addresses of the parked domains where Plaintiff's ads were placed, clicked on and subsequently charged for. Plaintiff also alleges that parked domains are a constant source of invalid clicks and that advertisers have no way to distinguish between valid and invalid clicks from parked domains. | ||
| 1-800 Contacts v. Lens.com Inc. et al | August 13, 2007 | |
| Plaintiff 1-800 Contacts, Inc. alleges that Defendant Lens.com, Inc. d/b/a Lens.com, JustLens.com and JustLenses.com had purchased sponsored advertisements from Google and other search engines for Plaintiff's marks. | ||