FactsDecisionCommentFactsTwo Taiwanese corporations used search engine optimisation (SEO) to improperly display particular model names on search engine display results, making customers mistakenly imagine that the shops have been promoting particular branded merchandise in order to promote their very own web site go to charges.DecisionOn 12 April 2022, the Fair Trade Commission determined that this behaviour violated article 25 of the Fair Trade Act, and imposed fines of 2 million and 800,000 new Taiwanese {dollars} on the 2 corporations, respectively.The Fair Trade Commission acknowledged that when customers enter a particular model title in Google, the model will seem in the search results. This is a consequence of these corporations utilizing SEO strategies. The Fair Trade Commission additional defined that it doesn’t oppose SEO in itself, however the presentation of search results shouldn’t have the impact of deceptive customers.When customers search for details about a particular model on Google, they might be attracted by deceptive textual content from corporations improperly utilizing SEO. This behaviour is equal to luring customers to the flawed road. It not solely will increase the customer price of the businesses’ web sites, however may additionally persuade customers to buy different manufacturers’ merchandise, thereby decreasing the gross sales alternatives for the manufacturers the customers initially looked for.CommentIn the previous, the Fair Trade Commission has discovered that utilizing the corporate title or trademark of a competitor’s enterprise as a key phrase advert for a enterprise, or juxtaposing the competitor’s enterprise title or trademark in a key phrase advert, violates article 25 of the Fair Trade Act.Although the businesses in this case didn’t instantly use different enterprises’ manufacturers as key phrase advertisements, the ultimate consequence nonetheless primarily constitutes “bait-and-swap” behaviour, in addition to interrupting customers’ regular search and buy habits. This behaviour additionally constitutes unfair competitors with different operators who promote branded merchandise.If improper SEO use stays unregulated, different opponents might imitate the behaviour in the long run, making it tougher for customers to distinguish the authenticity of the knowledge offered in the search results and threatening the competitors order of the e-commerce market and the pursuits of customers. The Fair Trade Commission thought-about that the act constituted misleading and clearly unfair behaviour that will be ample to have an effect on the transaction order and thus determined that it violated article 25 of the Fair Trade Act.For additional info on this matter please contact Ruey-Sen Tsai at Lee and Li Attorneys at Law by phone (+886 2 2763 8000) or e mail ([email protected]). The Lee and Li Attorneys at Law web site could be accessed at www.leeandli.com.
https://www.lexology.com/commentary/intellectual-property/taiwan/lee-and-li-attorneys-at-law/use-of-seo-to-improperly-display-trademarks-in-search-results-violates-fair-trade-act
