Google is not responsible for the content of the advertisements. Google is not a publisher. Google is only a transmitter. This has been ruled by the High Court of Australia that, after six years of legal course, absolves the seeker of misleading conduct charge because of its sponsored links.The Australian court’s decision may be key to similar lawsuits in courts around the world about the advertising content that are published in the form.
“Google is a worldwide business. This sentence is something like a top and add some clarity to the industry,” said the president of theAssociation of Internet Industry in Australia, Peter Lee, the agency Reuters.
The ruling has put an end to a six-year legal battle between Google and the consumer watchdog of Australia, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), which accused Google of engaging in conduct misleading paying ads.
The ACCC based its action on search results, 2006 and 2007, when the search for Honda Australia showed a paid advertisement by a competitor, carsales. The ACCC considered that the ads were misleading because Carsales suggested was linked to Honda Motor. Google argued that it was not responsible for the ads, as it was only the communication path to the advertiser.
The five judges of the High Court of Australia has ruled in favor of Google, overturning a ruling by the Federal Court. The trial court had ordered Google to create a program to ensure that paid ads in search engine were misleading. The five judges have claimed that not create Google sponsored links and that the company is not responsible for the posts in the links.
“The ACCC has taken this procedure to clarify the law on advertising practices in the Internet age,” said the chairman of the ACCC, Rod Sims.
The legal victory comes after Google and manufacturer of software language Rosetta Stone last year extra judicially resolve a dispute over trademark infringement in the United States on Google’s advertising practices. Rosetta argued the same thing: that people are looking for your products on Google was going to competitors and counterfeiters of software that is advertised next. The terms of that agreement have never been released. Also failed a similar claim of Louis Vuitton in the European courts.
The same case has been in Spain with the historical claim Oranges Lola, an agricultural pioneer of electronic commerce in Spain, which witnessed next to searches for your brand, competitive advantage for advertising popularity next. Oranges Lola, to counteract this effect, eventually spend money on Google and occupy and ad space next to your brand.
Despite the acquittal, Google has changed the way it displays its sponsored links in Australia.