A Delhi High Court ruling found Google liable for trademark infringement over its keyword advertising practices. Indian founders criticize Google's ad business.

The Delhi High Court ruled against Google on May 22 in a trademark dispute involving bathroom fittings maker Hindware. The court found Google liable for trademark infringement over its keyword advertising practices and awarded Hindware ₹3 million in nominal damages.

Court Ruling Details

Justice Mini Pushkarna rejected Google's argument that it was merely a passive intermediary in serving ads on its search platform. The judge said Google allowed Hindware's rivals to use 'Hindware' as a keyword to target users searching for the brand. Google was found to have infringed Hindware's right to exclusive use of its trademark under Section 28 of the Trade Marks Act.

Founder Reactions

Indian entrepreneurs, including Zerodha founder Nithin Kamath and Zoho founder Sridhar Vembu, publicly backed the ruling. Kamath said Zerodha had faced the issue for more than a decade, with competitors using Google's advertising tools to divert traffic from established brands. Google stated its Ads policy does not allow competitor advertisers to use trademarked terms in ad-text and that the policy is applied globally.

Implications and Analysis

Legal experts said the implications of the ruling may be narrower than some of the public reaction suggests. Aprajita Rana, a partner at AZB & Partners, stated that the judgment requires platforms to relook at their processes to see if their automated tools encourage or offer trademarked terms to advertisers. Rana noted that the decision does not have a far-reaching impact on online platforms' liability in India.

Key points

• The Delhi High Court ruled against Google on May 22 in a trademark dispute involving Hindware.
• Google was found liable for trademark infringement over its keyword advertising practices.
• Hindware was awarded ₹3 million in nominal damages.
• Indian entrepreneurs, including Nithin Kamath and Sridhar Vembu, publicly backed the ruling.
• Google stated its Ads policy does not allow competitor advertisers to use trademarked terms in ad-text.
• The ruling may require platforms to relook at their processes regarding trademarked terms.