Utah trademark law restricts competition

Perhaps we should reconsider looking at Utah as a model of government and business partnership.

The state has just passed a law banning search engine advertisers from using competitors’ trademarks as keywords to promote their own ads.

That means that if you search Google for “Micron”, AMI can’t pay to display their homepage. Dell can’t buy ad space on a search for “MPC.” Toyota can’t buy space on a search for “Honda.” (Hey Blueline- feel free to jump in any time.)

There’s enough opposition that Dan Eastman, the state senator who sponsored the bill, has mounted a public defense, even though the ban is already law. He’s net savvy too – he’s using his blog to spread the word:

Electronic trademarks are protected around the globe, just not in the U.S. or Canada. There seem to be few applicable laws with teeth. Trademark violations on the internet are rampant. In some cases people invest millions on their trademark, only to have their customers’ on-line word searches shanghaied by a pirate who bought off the search engines.

One important thing to remember is the fact that only advertisements are being referred to here. Google is not selling actual search result placement; that is, Pontiac does not have to pay a single dime in order to ensure that its site is the first listed in the unsponsored search results. Think about offline analogues for a moment: Mazda would be well within its rights to purchase billboards right next door to Pontiac dealers that promote its own cars. Should this practice be banned? Does it require Pontiac to pay massive "protection money" to billboard companies in order to defend its brand?