Appeared in the Toronto Star on June 14, 2010 as Opening Up Canada's Digital Economy Strategy The federal government’s national consultation on a digital economy strategy is now past the half-way mark having generated a somewhat tepid response so far. The consultation document itself may bear some of the blame […]
Search Results for "Law Bytes" : 862
B.C. Court Clicks With Internet Advertising Keyword Case
Google has grown to become the world’s leading Internet company based largely on accurate search results, yet its financial success owes much to tiny advertisements that are posted as sponsored links alongside the "organic" search results. The determination of which sponsored links appear on a Google search result page comes in part from a keyword advertising system in which marketers bid on specific words. Whenever a user clicks on the sponsored link, the marketer pays Google the bid amount. Each click may only cost a few pennies, but with millions of clicks every day, the keyword advertising business is a multi-billion dollar business for Google and has been emulated by competitors such as Yahoo and Microsoft.
Keyword advertising has been a huge commercial success fueling many ad-supported websites, but it has not been without legal controversy. The practice has generated a steady stream of cases addressing whether the use of a competitor's keyword raise potential trademark or misleading advertising issues. For example, is Coca-Cola permitted to bid on the Pepsi keyword so that when an Internet user searches for Pepsi they are presented with a sponsored link for Coke?
The issue has been litigated in other countries, but my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that late last month a B.C. court provided the Canadian perspective for the first time.
B.C. Court Clicks in Internet Advertising Keyword Case
Appeared in the Toronto Star on June 7, 2010 as Google's Keywords Belong to Top Bidders Google has grown to become the world’s leading Internet company based largely on accurate search results, yet its financial success owes much to tiny advertisements that are posted as sponsored links alongside the "organic" […]
Security Breach Disclosure Bill Has Bark But No Bite
Last week Industry Minister Tony Clement unveiled two bills touted as important components of the government’s national digital strategy. The Fighting Internet and Wireless Spam Act is a repeat of the anti-spam bill that passed through the House of Commons last year but died after Parliament prorogued. Since the new bill reflects roughly the same compromise that garnered all-party support, it should receive swift passage.
My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) argues that the second bill, the Safeguarding Canadians' Personal Information Act, is likely to be far more controversial. The bill amends Canada’s existing privacy legislation by establishing new exceptions for businesses and new powers for law enforcement.
Security Breach Disclosure Bill Has Bark But No Bite
Appeared in the Toronto Star on May 31, 2010 as Security breach disclosure bill has bark but no bite Last week Industry Minister Tony Clement unveiled two bills touted as important components of the government’s national digital strategy. The Fighting Internet and Wireless Spam Act is a repeat of the […]
Recent Posts
Why The Senate Got Antisemitism Only Half-Right 
The Government Doubles Down on News Sector Support: Fiscal Update Opens the Door to Tens of Millions in Tax Credits for Bell, Rogers and Corus 
The Illusion of Protection: Why Canada’s Growing Push to Ban Social Media for Kids Won’t Work 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 266: Justin Safayeni on the Ontario Government’s Overnight Evisceration of Access to Information 
AI Without Canada: Why the Heritage Committee’s AI Report Could Lead to Less Canadian Content in the Training Data
