Recognizing The Real Issues Associated With Trademarked Keyword Ads

Grok Headline matches for Recognizing The Real Issues Associated With Trademarked Keyword Ads

meanwhile, in the world of real issues

meanwhile, in the world of real issues 09/15/2004 09:25 AM
Making Torture Legal, a story by Anthony Lewis about an issue that ought to be an issue in this issueless campaign, is the best of its kind that I've seen. It was referred to me by an Israeli friend. As he said to me, "of course there is torture in Israeli prisons, but there is nothing remotely as bad as this." Truth, and justice. May it again be the American way.

Accessibility Issues In The Real World

Accessibility Issues In The Real World 06/11/2002 06:52 AM
"To be honest, my considerations in regard to usability and accessibility extended to making sure sites were cross- browser compliant. That changed when I was handed the task of developing content for several sites that by necessity must be accessible to people with impaired vision. "

Why Our Choice Of Language Prevents Us
From Debating The Real Issues

Why Our Choice Of Language Prevents Us
From Debating The Real Issues 04/09/2004 05:29 PM
It's important to remember (though, very easy to forget) that language choices are not neutral. You can explain the same thing in many different ways and lead people to very different conclusions. One area where that's clear is in the current debate over "intellectual property," where terms like "piracy" and "theft" get thrown around like facts - when they're weight words. As Kevin Werbach points out, you can see this in the language the Justice Department is using to announce their "Intellectual Property Task Force." Obviously, there are very important issues to be debated concerning how we deal with intellectual property. Instead of tackling those issues, however, this task force is being built to deal with the "destructive consequences of intellectual property theft." That's nice, if we're sure there's a real problem. There's been plenty of evidence lately that perhaps we've gone too far in trying to protect intellectual property - and we shouldn't be worrying so much about enforcing intellectual property laws, as we should be discussing how those laws need to be reformed. Of course, throwing people in jail is an easier to understand goal than looking at the real issues surrounding intellectual property law.

Recognizing openness

Recognizing openness 07/19/2004 04:58 PM
Michael O'Connell: I sense that Microsoft has been rather concerned about Linux lately. Why else would their top dog, CEO Steve Ballmer, get so riled up when asked this week ...

NTT DoCoMo's object-recognizing
binoculars

NTT DoCoMo's object-recognizing
binoculars 03/28/2005 04:13 AM
Engadget Mar 28 2005 7:42AM GMT

THE REAL
ISSUES, AND WHY NO ONE TALKS ABOUT
THEM

THE REAL
ISSUES, AND WHY NO ONE TALKS ABOUT
THEM 09/07/2004 04:18 PM

As my regular readers know, this weblog is just a means to an end. The 'end' is a number of things: Getting people aware of and knowledgeable about and energized about the really important issues, not the ones they're spoon-fed by the pandering media; and exploring, and discussing out loud, and then acting on real solutions to those issues. These issues are all complex, and people appreciate that they are complex, which is why it's so infuriating to watch the candidates, the pollsters and the media attempt to reduce them to absurdly simple sound-bites and either/or decisions. Just to take one example: I'm convinced that a key solution to inequality in our society is teaching people how to establish their own small businesses. What 'issue' does that fall under: Employment, Education or Poverty? All of the issues are to some extent interrelated, and pigeon-holing voters' and candidates' positions on these issues is not only impossible, it impedes people from thinking holistically about these issues. What I find particularly outrageous is that pollsters very rarely even ask voters what they think are the important issues to be addressed, nor do they separate issues that can (or should) reasonably addressed by political bodies from those that need to be addressed by every one of us, as responsible citizens and individuals. This suggests, not so subtly, that we as citizens and consumers have no responsibility for dealing with issues, and that political actions are the solution to everything. And on those rare occasions when voters are asked (rather than told) what the major issues are, they are forced to pick from a pre-selected, and horribly biased, list of issues that the major parties have chosen for them. Here is an alphabetical list of all 43 issues that, from what I can find, the candidates in the upcoming US election have been asked for, or have expressed, an opinion on. In the 2004 polls I can find, the 28 in red italics have not been included in any lists of 'important issues' that people have been asked to choose the 'one most important' from: Mostly Political Issues: Campaign Finance Reform Civil Rights & Freedoms Defense Spending/Military Policy Foreign Policy: Middle East Foreign Policy: Rest of the World Gerrymandering Lobbying Separation of Church and State Term Limits Terrorism Mostly Economic Issues: Corporate Power & Regulation Deficits Fiscal & Monetary Policy Free Trade & Globalization Taxes: Flat vs Progressive Taxes: Overall Level Mostly Social & Educational Issues: Abortion Crime: Prevention Crime: Punishment Conservation: Drilling, Logging, Mining Policy Conservation: Programs & Incentives Education: Control & Funding Education: Curriculum Education: School Prayer Education: Sex Education Education: Vouchers Environmental Protection Global Warming Gun Control Health Care: Accessibility & Equality Health Care: Public vs Private Illegal Drug Policy Immigration Policy Overpopulation & Family Planning Policy Poverty Same-Sex Marriage Mostly Business & Technology Issues: Labour Union Policy Minimum Wage/Wage Gap Oil Shortages and Prices R&D/Innovation Funding & Support Self-Employment Options Stem Cell Research Unemployment Notice that the 15 non-italicized 'options' that pollsters give you to choose from as 'most important' issues are heavily biased towards (a) moral issues, and (b) issues with few options and little complexity. In fact, the 'selection' of these 15 issues makes the job easy for the pollsters, the media, the two main parties and dumbed-down voters, because: The positions of the two main parties on the 5 identified political and economic issues are virtually indistinguishable, The positions of the two main parties on the 10 identified social and educational and business issues are diametrically opposed, 'classical' liberal and conservative positions: Republicans Democrats Abortion opposed matter of choice Punishment of Crime stricter, more prisons, 2 strikes more focus on prevention School Prayer support opposed Sex Education opposed, kids should abstain support Vouchers support opposed Gun Control opposed support Health Care Accessibility basics for all, 2-tier for rest universal and equal Same-Sex Marriage opposed support Stem-Cell Research opposed support Unemployment 'the market' will fix it help you get back on your feet For the most part, a 'moderate' position on these 10 issues has been so well entrenched by previous lawmakers and by the courts that there is very little chance of any real change in laws in these areas, so both sides can posture safely to their constituencies knowing they'll never have to deal with the consequences (and political blow-back) of living with radical laws on any of these issues. No wonder so many voters believe that, despite the differences in policies, it doesn't really make any difference which gets elected. Meanwhile the 28 real issues listed in italics above -- the resolution of which (or our failure to properly address) will have far-reaching implications for the type of world we live in in the future, the quality of our lives, and quite possibly our survival as a species, get next to no attention in the campaigns and in the media. The candidates are free to talk about these at a very high level, speaking in platitudes about their importance but making no promises, taking no strong stands, and offering no plan of action for dealing with them. Why? Because of the tacit agreement by pollsters not to raise them, the media to talk about them as important and complex and difficult but not urgent, and to play down any solutions that might require a party to take a political stand, the major parties not to force the other's hand by getting into a no-win (for them) debate on these intractible and expensive problems, and we, the citizens, who won't call any of these three complicitous groups to account for their unwillingness to tackle these real issues in more than non-committal, hand-wringing ways. So what is the answer? Partly, we need a host of democratic reforms (campaign finance reform, voting system reform, an end to gerrymandering etc.) that will open up the political systems in the English-speaking nations to third parties and hence broaden debate to cover issues that any party considers important. Partly, too, we need media reforms (political independence from corporate ownership and control, local autonomy, less concentration of ownership, less dependence on corporate advertising) that will encourage and enable the mainstream media to cover a broader range of issues, educate the public about these issues, and challenge politicians to take clear and actionable positions on them. Ultimately, though, it's up to us to realize we're being had, to educate ourselves about the critical issues that face our world, and to take personal responsibility for addressing them. We can refuse to vote for politicians who don't take a clear stand on these issues, who fail to deliver on their promises, or who block the needed democratic and media reforms described above, abandon mass media that pander to political interests and public ignorance, in favour of independent media and public broadcasters that present fuller, better information, refuse to buy from corporation s that lobby for laws against the public interest, support dishonest and disreputable politicians, or exhibit socially or environmentally irresponsible behaviours, consume less, and recycle more, and in general take more personal responsibility as consumers, work for changes in the education system that will give future generations the knowledge and skills needed to understand and deal with these issues, using social pressure, technology and entrepreneurship, instead of waiting for politicians and regulators to do everything for us, become volunteers and activists, to bring about change person-to-person, at a level far more meaningful and effective than anything centralized government can hope to accomplish, and perhaps most importantly, engage each other in meaningful discourse, 'smarten each other up' by sharing information and ideas and engaging in critical debate on real issues and brainstorming on possible solutions when we meet socially, instead of letting the media dictate the subjects of our conversation. The current system works well for those with political power and economic wealth, protecting it and entrenching it. Big corporations (including the big media) and major political parties have no motivation to change the system. The dumbing-down of public discourse to simple, often trivial issues plays right into their hands. But their power depends on our complacency. Think about your children and grandchildren, decide what are your real issues, and start talking about them, and doing something about them. Don't wait for the politicians and other 'leaders' to catch up -- there's nothing in it for them. It's time to leave them behind, give up on them, and take matters into our own hands, before it's too late.

12-March-2003 -- Unskilled and Unaware
of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing
One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated
Self-Assessments

12-March-2003 -- Unskilled and Unaware
of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing
One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated
Self-Assessments 03/13/2003 12:21 AM
Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments (Journal of Personality and...

Trademarked registered copyright

Trademarked registered copyright 10/30/2003 09:14 AM
This work is dedicated to the Public Domain. trademarked registered copyright 2003 Copyright symbol, registered trade mark symbol, trademark symbol, copyright 2003 David Weinberger David Weinberger David Weinberger -->...

trademarked, patented shrubbery

trademarked, patented shrubbery 05/23/2004 12:19 PM

As I'm planting my front yard, I'm doing a lot of research on various plants and trees. One tree that caught my eye for one spot is this Ri ver Birch. But the wacky thing about it is that the name is a registered trademark and it also carries this warning "Propagation of this plant is prohibited due to patent protection."

Patented garden plants? I suddenly had visions of a sci-fi future where Johnny Appleseed works for Monsanto, and you're not allowed to eat the apples or graft new trees since it's all copyrighted, patented, and trademarked up the wazoo.

I think I'll get a different tree for that spot.

Yet Another Lawsuit Over Trademarked Ad
Words

Yet Another Lawsuit Over Trademarked Ad
Words 01/29/2004 02:49 AM
Well, that didn't take long. Less than a week after AOL paid up to settle the lawsuit they were dealing with over selling trademarked words and phrases as search keywords, a company is suing Google, AOL and other Google partners for basically the same thing. In this case, American Blind and Wallpaper Factory told Google to stop selling keywords based on their trademarks. Google told them they would stop selling on things like "American Blind Factory" and "DecorateToday," but saw no reason to stop on such generic terms as "American wallpaper" and "American blind." In fact, Google went so far as to ask a judge to say this was perfectly fine. In response, American Blind is suing them. Let's try this once again: the point of trademark is to make sure no one is misled. That's not what happens at all when someone is buying keywords on your trademark. Trademarks don't give you a monopoly over the word or phrase - they just let you stop people from confusing customers into think they're you, or that you endorse them somehow. However, ads are clearly ads, and targeting them at people who might be interested in your offering (so long as they don't misrepresent themselves) is a perfectly justifiable thing to do. It's the same thing as getting shelf-placement near other, similar products.

Google to sell trademarked keywords

Google to sell trademarked keywords 04/13/2004 03:35 PM
MSNBC Apr 13 2004 8:12PM GMT

Google Fined for Trademarked AdWords
Text

Google Fined for Trademarked AdWords
Text 10/29/2003 01:14 AM
"The Lower Court of Nanterre required Google France to pay 70,000 euros (about $81,400) to two companies that owned the rights to certain words. Google France sold the use of these words to advertisers through its AdWords program."

Now Google Getting Sued For Blocking
Trademarked Terms

Now Google Getting Sued For Blocking
Trademarked Terms 12/12/2003 03:10 PM
A few months back, France fined Google for selling ads based on trademarked terms. I was surprised, because in my own experiments with Google ads, I've had a few ads that were rejected because they (according to Google) contained trademarked terms. Personally, I don't see how buying a keyword is, in any way, a violation of trademark. The point of a trademark is to protect the company from having someone else appear to be you. You can't sell Bob's Cola and put a Coca-Cola label on it. However, if someone is looking for Coca-Cola, there's nothing wrong with suggesting they might also want to look at Bob's Cola, as well. Anyway, now it looks like Google may get hit from the other side as well. They've been fined for selling ads based on trademarks, and now, apparently, they're going to ge t sued for blocking ads based on trademark complaints. The pending lawsuit apparently says that Google is banning ads on terms that aren't trademarked as soon as anyone complains. That is, Google doesn't check to see if there's an actual trademark - they just ban the ad as soon as there's a complaint. The group that's going to sue says they've brought together over 3,000 complaining advertisers who have had ads blocked. As mentioned, I've had my ads blocked too, but this seems like a ridiculous lawsuit. Where in the law does it say that Google has to sell you ads for whatever you want? They have the right to reject ads for whatever reason they want. It is their system, after all. If people believe they're blocking ads unfairly, then isn't that an opening for competitors to better serve advertisers by offering them something that Google doesn't?

Google Says Okay To Selling Trademarked
Search Terms

Google Says Okay To Selling Trademarked
Search Terms 04/13/2004 02:10 PM
Considering the fact that they've come out on the losing end of a number of cases on this subject, it's a bit surprising that Google is so aggressively changing their ad terms to say that they will no longer prevent advertisers from buying ads based on trademarked keywords. There have been a ton of cases on this, from France< /a> to wallpap er to eBay to Playboy . In fact, despite all of this, Google was also sued by someone else who felt it was illegal that they were illega lly blocked from buying a trademarked keyword. While I think Google's position is the right one, the track record in court doesn't seem good. As we've said many, many times before, a trademark doesn't give you full control over a word or phrase. It's only designed to prevent confusion over the trademark. That is, if someone is presenting themselves as your company or your product, they have violated your trademark. However, to simply advertise themselves to anyone searching for your trademark - as long as it's clear that they're a different company - doesn't not violate the trademark. It's simply a good marketing strategy to position yourself where people are looking for that type of product. It's the same thing as making sure you're on the shelf in the store near your competitor. Thus, it seems as though Google's new rules fit with the spirit of trademark, but unfortunately too many people are misinterpreting trademark in a way to believe that it means you have total control over the trademarked word or phrase. No matter what, there are going to be a lot more lawsuits over this.

Google Wins Lawsuit In Germany Over
Trademarked Terms

Google Wins Lawsuit In Germany Over
Trademarked Terms 09/21/2004 12:29 PM
While the courts in the US still seem to be a bit confused over the purpose of trademarks in lawsu its against Google concerning advertising based on trademarked keywords, it looks like the German courts may have a clearer picture. A similar lawsuit brought against Google in Germany has been dismissed, though details are not given. Again, the purpose of a trademark is to avoid confusion for the customer. That is, it's designed to protect another company from misleading someone into believing they're a different (usually more popular) company. However, advertising somewhere where people are looking for a particular brand is simply good marketing, not trademark infringement. Just go into your local supermarket, and look at all the similar products stacked near each other, the aisle coupons for other products, and the receipt coupons advertising competing products after you pay. There's no confusion over brands -- it's just advertising.

Bodog Becomes First Official Online
Gambling Brand Trademarked in the US

Bodog Becomes First Official Online
Gambling Brand Trademarked in the US 03/14/2005 06:00 PM
Winner Online Mar 13 2005 5:52PM GMT

AXA takes Google AdWords to French Court
over Trademarked Terms

AXA takes Google AdWords to French Court
over Trademarked Terms 04/27/2004 08:08 PM
Search Engine Journal Apr 28 2004 0:30AM GMT

REAL Software Announces REAL World 2005
Conference Dates and Location

REAL Software Announces REAL World 2005
Conference Dates and Location 08/27/2004 02:00 PM
AUSTIN, Texas (August 26, 2004) - REAL Software, Inc. announced today that REAL World 2005, The REALbasic User Conference, will be held March 23-25, 2005 at the Austin Convention Center in Austin, Texas. Noted REALbasic authors and experts and REAL Software engineers will be presenting sessions at REAL World 2005.

"REAL World is the perfect opportunity for REALbasic users, both expert and novice alike, to get together to share ideas, information and techniques. Attendees gain critical content that helps make them better, more informed REALbasic developers," offered Geoff Perlman, president and CEO of REAL Software.

Virtual Real Estate Boom Draws Real
Dollars (Reuters)

Virtual Real Estate Boom Draws Real
Dollars (Reuters) 06/02/2004 03:30 PM
Reuters - Rising interest rates have yet to cool white-hot real estate prices. Perhaps that's why the concept of virtual home ownership has captured the imagination of a growing number of online gamers, who are plunking down real cash for their own slice of the digital frontier.

Virtual Real Estate Boom Draws Real
Dollars

Virtual Real Estate Boom Draws Real
Dollars 06/03/2004 03:29 PM

Virtual computing offers real benefits,
real challenges

Virtual computing offers real benefits,
real challenges 04/29/2004 10:42 AM
ZDNet UK Apr 29 2004 1:50PM GMT

How Does One Become an AOL Keyword

How Does One Become an AOL Keyword 01/13/2003 02:50 AM

Revolution is Not an AOL Keyword

Revolution is Not an AOL Keyword 03/20/2003 01:01 PM
Eddan Katz has posted a brilliant, high-larious, hyper-linked adaptation of Gil-Scott Heron's "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" to bIPlog, entitled, Revolution is Not an AOL Keyword:

You will not be able to stay home, dear Netizen.
You will not be able to plug in, log on and opt out.
You will not be able to lose yourself in Final Fantasy,
Or hold your Kazaa download queues,
Because revolution is not an AOL Keyword...

Revolution will not be right back after
Pop-up ads about eCommerce, eTailers, or eContent.
You will not have to worry about a
Cookie in your browser, a bug in your email, or a
Worm in your recycling bin.
Revolution will not run faster with Intel inside.
Revolution, dude, is not getting a Dell.
Revolution will increase your Google rank.

Revolution is not an AOL Keyword, is not an AOL Keyword,
Is not an AOL Keyword, is not an AOL Keyword.
Revolution will be no stream or download, dear Netizen;
Revolution must still be live.

Link Discuss (Thanks, Mary!)

Keyword ad quandary

Keyword ad quandary 01/23/2004 07:38 PM
But many big companies haven't noticed the issue yet. If and when they do, they could cut into the revenue streams of Google, Yahoo, and others. ...

Get your keyword watchlists here!

Get your keyword watchlists here! 01/04/2005 11:16 PM
I'm proud to announce that Technorati has just launched our new Keyword Watchlist service, which now allows you to track and subscribe to live searches on keywords and phrases. For example, say you're interested in keeping track of the...

Keyword Assistant 1.7

Keyword Assistant 1.7 08/03/2004 04:05 PM
iPhoto keyword management plugin.

Keyword Chicanery

Keyword Chicanery 04/04/2005 03:30 PM

Does anyone have any current data or opinion on the legality of using a competitor's name (both business and personal name) in the keywords for a site?

We have a client whose competitor has listed the client's business name and the client's personal name in their keywords in a sleazy attempt to capture search traffic (it's a professional services business where as many people know the business owner's name as know the company name). It's not working, but it just pisses me off on principle.

I know this isn't the first time this has happened, but if someone can enlighten me on where we stand legally, I'd appreciate it. I'm guessing the answer is a big "you're screwed," but I figured I'd check.

Banning By Keyword?

Banning By Keyword? 08/09/2004 03:09 PM
It's well known that China blocks out certain websites, but their latest move to stop people from accessing content the government considers harmful is to have certain local search engines ban keywords. Apparently, popular Chinese search engine Baidu has a list of about 40,000 banned keywords. It's not entirely clear what happens if someone does search on a banned keyword (0 search results? told you've searched on banned words? immediately told to report to the local prison?), but with so many banned keywords there must be an awful lot of collateral damage in terms of perfectly reasonable websites that can't be found. Of course, it's been clear for a while that the Chinese government really isn't too concerned with "false positives" in their efforts to ban anything they consider to be "harmful" online.

Keyword Density 2003

Keyword Density 2003 03/11/2003 01:22 AM
No, your eyes do not deceive you - it really is 2003, and we are still having that density discussion.

Keyword search ads are live

Keyword search ads are live 06/24/2004 11:44 AM

Well, there's been a lot going on over at Technorati, and I've been so busy that blogging has been pretty light. I hope that I can blog more often as the summer continues.

Anyway, here's some fun news that I'm happy to report: Technorati has taken its first steps towards the business models that we've chosen: We've rolled out keyword search advertising on the website. You'll notice the "Sponsored Links" box on the right hand side of the results page on many terms that you do searches upon. This is done through a partnership we have with findwhat.com, and quite frankly, it is just a first step. There's a lot of improvements and changes that we want to make, and this is definitely a "crawl-before-you-walk" kind of opportunity, but it is a first step. For example, I want to have a system that makes it easier to do targeting (blog-based? topic based? authority-based?) and get better reporting. We're also really interested in your feedback - leave a comment or a link, or drop us a line at feedback@technorati.com. We are also working on implementing a lot of the great feedback we got at the developer's forum last month.

Oh yeah - if you're interested in seeing your ads on technorati.com search results today, here's how you get more information.

Lastly, big kudos to all the folks back at the office, who made this happen - you guys rock.

Since this price is the keyword, one
could simply just go wi

Since this price is the keyword, one
could simply just go wi 08/08/2004 05:28 PM
TechTree Aug 8 2004 8:43PM GMT

Keyword Press Release

Keyword Press Release 02/11/2004 10:56 AM
Hotspot firm issues press release with good keywords: When you see a press release of this form, a company has paid Business Wire or PRNewswire to distribute a press release that contains as many business names as possible to meet keyword matches at stock and news sites for investors and analysts who scan for information. In this short release, the company mentions Subway (which is only tangentially related, as the consultant they're trumpeting having hired is a franchise holder) in the headline, and a host of firms in this sentence: Currently, the company is targeting the ownership and operation of successful franchises such as Dairy Queen (NYSE:BRK.a), Subway, McDonalds (NYSE:MCD), Burger King, Baskin-Robbins, Ben & Jerry's, Carls. Jr. (NYSE:CKR), TCBY Yogurt, and Mrs. Fields. Back when Amazon.com's affiliate program for allowing sales to be referred to them for commissions was new, the tiniest dotcoms would issue press releases that they had "partnered" with Amazon.com when, in fact, they'd just signed up as an affiliate. Amazon.com started enforcing a contract provision that said affiliates weren't allowed to issue such releases. This release goes a step further, as the company has no direct relationship with any of the firms mentioned; this is just unabashed PR keyword spamming. The company's own site only lists a handful of locations in press releases; there's no location finder. Did you notice I didn't mention the firm's name? I'm not out to give them more indirect publicity....

Keyword or Brandable Domain Name

Keyword or Brandable Domain Name 02/24/2003 09:11 AM
It's a staple topic of optimization - to go keyword domain or not to go keyword domain?

Keyword for Wiki News

Keyword for Wiki News 04/14/2005 01:47 PM
Organizations searching for a wiki should try Socialtext. Just testing to see my spammer keys on the word Keyword and if this post rises to the top of blog indexes....

How Effective Is Your Keyword Research?

How Effective Is Your Keyword Research? 08/30/2004 01:46 PM
Source: ClickZ - Keyword analysis can be performed on three levels: keyword research tools, web analytics software, and site search engines. Data-mining all three levels provides site owners with the full perspective of how target audiences find the information on...

Innovation as a Keyword for News

Innovation as a Keyword for News 04/05/2005 01:51 PM
Stopping by the Second Innovation Journalism conference, defined as journalism dedicated to the coverage of innovation.  Here are some notes from last year.  Heading to OSBC later, so can only share some notes... Notes from a presentation by Johan...

Assessing Keyword Relevance

Assessing Keyword Relevance 03/31/2005 12:24 AM

When to Kill a Keyword Listing

When to Kill a Keyword Listing 06/04/2004 06:45 PM
ClickZ - When do you drop a keyword listing out of high-volume, premium positions? When do you remove it from a campaign altogether? Strategies and tactics....

Google Fed Up With Bad Keyword Choices

Google Fed Up With Bad Keyword Choices 05/10/2004 01:30 PM
Search engine optimizers charge a lot of money to companies to help them choose better keywords to trigger their Google ads. However, it appears Google thinks they can do a better job themselves (or at least help those who don't bother shelling out money to an SEO firm) by scann ing the advertiser's website and automatically picking the best keywords to trigger ads. This seems like a natural extension of their contextual advertising offering - where the idea is to scan content pages to determine what kind of advertising should show up on that page. The difference here is they'll be scanning pages to determine what kind of advertising should attract people to that page. One aspect of this would apparently allow online merchants to provide a data feed of their products, to automatically have them show up in (hopefully relevant) searches as text ads. In some ways this is quite similar to the technique used for paid-inclusion in other search engines - but the ads will still be separate. As with any automation of such things, the big question is in how well it works. Companies aren't going to be thrilled if their advertising starts showing up on searches that have no relevance.
Grok Description matches for Recognizing The Real Issues Associated With Trademarked Keyword Ads
GrokA matches for Recognizing The Real Issues Associated With Trademarked Keyword Ads

Recognizing The Real Issues Associated With Trademarked Keyword Ads

The following phrases have been identified by the grok system as matching this entry: