*Finally! Doctoral Studies Completed!

Dear Readers, apart from all the people who supported me during my studies in the ‘brick and mortar world‘, I’d like to especially thank YOU for following my website.

When I started doing my research in 2007 the question of the legality of keyword advertising appeared in Austria to be very straight forward. The Austrian Supreme Court (OGH) in Wein&Co (OGH, 20.03.2007, 17Ob 1/07g) had ruled, without going into much detail, that the booking of a competitor’s trademark as a keyword on Google AdWords constituted per se an infringement trademark law as well as an unfair practise of competition.

It took until early 2010 before the disputable view of the Austrian court got turned over by the ECJ decision in BergSpechte (OGH, 21.05.2008, 17 Ob 1/07g). The Austrian court consequently had to follow the ECJ’s guidance, but still remains, using the room of interpretation left by the ECJ, to be one of the most conservative (right-holder friendly) courts in Europe in this respect.

In the three year period between the OGH’s decision in 2007 and the ECJ’s decision in 2010 I received a lot of positive feedback and input on my blog about my critical analysis of the Austrian situation which encouraged me to continue with my research while most of my Austrian colleagues regarded it to be rather pointless.

I especially want to highlight the value of the comments readers left beneath my posts to me, as they provided me with continuous feedback which was mostly encouraging but sometimes also clearly showed me that my concepts were flawed or that my assumptions (e.g. on the dynamic keyword insertion; thank you matt van wagner & Michael Aringer of Limesoda ) were simply wrong ...

Zum vollständigen Artikel

Cookies helfen bei der Bereitstellung unserer Dienste. Durch die Nutzung erklären Sie sich mit der Cookie-Setzung einverstanden. Mehr OK