Utah vs. Adwords

14 comments

If there are any SEO/SEM firms in Utah, they are going to be moving soon. Utah recently passed a law allowing companies to register keywords and when registered, it will be illegal for anybody else to advertise based on those keywords. Of course, this just applies to ads displayed in Utah or ads purchased by companies based in Utah.

The EFF has a brief synopsis, the law itself is here.

It will be interesting to see whether or not Google has a public response as the news item is gaining momentum pretty quickly.

Comments

I don't understand this

This doesn't make sense... if my client registers a domain name, I am not allowed to promote it?

I think the best way to describe this

is STUPID

Another...

waste of taxpayers money due to incompetent lawmakers. Just goes to show you that most people still do not understand the size and scope of the Internet and the influence it has on the changing advertising landscape.

Are there any editors that

Are there any editors that proof read these story submissions? This bill is about protecting trademarks in advertising and not a monopolizing keyword free-for-all to block out competitors. I think EFF is dead on

That's why comparative trademark use is clearly protected under federal trademark law. If it weren't, Pepsi wouldn't be able to tell consumers that more people think Pepsi tastes better than Coke, and Apple wouldn't be able to make fun of Microsoft on national television every night.

Ya this bill is Utarded however the bad reporting of the article is even worse...

..

This law is ALL ABOUT protecting a few local business in Utah.

The funny part about this I see, is that this law is going to cost the entire state of Utah a lot of money in the long run.

But what the hell, a few big money political donors businesses will get some (very little) protection from the competition...

American law makers at work, makes you crave anarchy don't it?

why whY WHY!?!?!?

Why did we ever let those Mor(m)ons join the United States in the first place?

>>Why did we ever

I suppose the same reason women were allowed to vote and the civil war was fought. All of which are issues that people, like you, still wish had went the other way.

Still - on the surface it seems like an ignorant law. Apple vacations vs Apple computers. Who gets left out?

..

>> "Who gets left out?"

The guy selling locally grown Apples.

Oh puleeeze

Comparing the right of women to vote and the fight against slavery to "Buchanan's Blunder" is just silly and shows a true lack of historical perspective.

>>historical perspective

I wasn't thinking of anything historical - I went to a state University and I get the feeling from your lofty tone that I wouldn't be up to the challenge of a historical debate. Not to mention it doesn't belong in this forum.

I was simply pointing out that the *mentality* of a person who posts that Mormons = morons and that they shouldn't have been allowed statehood is the same mentality displayed by misogynistic and/or bigoted individuals.

Sorry for the historical confusion - I had to look up "Buchanan's Blunder". I thought it was the law in Missouri making it legal to kill any Mormon man, woman or child up until 1976. Just goes to show how poor I am at history.

Why did we ever let those

Why did we ever let those Mor(m)ons join the United States in the first place?

Bill if you don't have anything smart to contribute, then shut the hell up.

Well...

Bill if you don't have anything smart to contribute, then shut the hell up.

If everyone did that we'd hear chirping crickets.

Besides, half of my family got sucked into that religion so it appears I have a little bit of bias towards the LDS which I probably should've left alone. They used to be a fun loving bunch and now everything is a sin, I'm going to hell or so I hear, I guess I'm just sick of all things Utah-based.

This law just sounded like more of the same.

There's More to the Story

See what the local paper had to say about it:
http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_5639856

It looks like there's more to this law than just the guise of "trademark protection". If you read the article you'll find that the main proponent of the bill is looking for a contract to help enforce the law... I guess the legislature doesn't consider that a conflict of interest.

I really wish our state legislators would stop trying to regulate things they don't understand. What upsets me more than anything is that they're wasting my tax dollars!!!

Quote: I really wish our

Quote:
I really wish our state legislators would stop trying to regulate things they don't understand. What upsets me more than anything is that they're wasting my tax dollars!!!

Ha.

They under$tand it quite well. And they're not wa$ting your tax dollars, they're $pending your tax dollars.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.