How Brands Use Trademark Law to Gain Competitive Advantage Online

There is a virtual war in online marketing taking place, fueled by search queries, big data, and unprecedented levels of interactive brand engagement. Except the theater for this war is not storefronts, print ads and billboards, it is Google, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, Mobile App Stores, and many other fertile digital platforms where consumers find their favorite brands, and advertisers hunt shoppers. The fact that we survive it all and can still check email is a miracle.

Today’s brands use a variety of creative and technical tools to identify themselves on the web, and to target, speak to, and “connect with” their loyalists online. In cases where these digital tools, typically consisting of product names, company names, slogans, domain names, QR Codes, social media handles, search keywords, and hashtags (collectively “Digital Marketing Insignia”) fall under trademark subject matter, brand owners can control valuable digital real estate through trademark protection and gain competitive advantage on the web.


Trademarks provide the exclusive right to promote goods and services under distinguishable words, phrases, symbols, designs or a combination thereof. Rooted in consumer protection law, a trademark is legally a source identifier, a shortcut that communicates the source of the goods and services being promoted. In some cases Digital Marketing Insignia such as domain names, hashtags, or even stylized QR codes contain trademark subject matter, and that is when trademark protection is a useful weapon to help monopolize key areas on the web when a consumer is searching or shopping online.

To bring a prima facie trademark infringement case, a plaintiff must prove:

  • Ownership of valid trademark
  • Priority
  • Use in commerce in connection with sale of goods or services
  • Likelihood of consumer confusion

When brands use Digital Marketing Insignia to promote their products online, trademark law can help protect valuable digital real estate where competitors may piggyback on famous marks. Vigilant trademark monitoring and enforcement can help defend against these unfair and often illegal practices.

As an example, consider one of the most famous trademarks of McDonald’s Corporation, U.S. Registration No. 2035587  for BIG MAC filed under sandwiches for consumption on or off premises in international class 030. As owner of the BIG MAC trademark,  McDonald’s Corp. may choose to promote its famous sandwich on the web at, or at, under the social media handle @bigmac (Instagram and Twitter), in search results under Google keyword: Big Mac, or in social media search results under hashtag: Big Mac (#bigmac).


If a competing restaurant promotes its products when a user searches the web for “Big Mac”, or if a competitor hosts a twitter party under #BigMacSucks (yes there is such a thing as twitter parties), or sets up a website under the domain name, do any of these uses of Digital Marketing Insignia constitute trademark infringement? The answer depends on whether the brand owner can prove the four elements of trademark infringement (above). Many courts have ruled, for example, that keyword triggering fulfills the use in commerce requirement of trademark infringement, and if the other elements can be proven, such as likelihood of consumer confusion, then infringement exists (See Buying for the Home v. Humble Abode, 459 F. Supp 2d 310 (D.N.J. Oct. 20, 2006), Edina Realty v. The, 2006 WL 737064 (D. Minn. Mar. 20, 2006), Hearts on Fire Co. v. Blue Nile, Inc. 2009 WL 794482 (D. Mass., March 2009)).  Other courts have ruled to the contrary (See Site Pro-1 v. Better Metal, 506 F. Supp 2d 123 (E.D.N.Y. May 9, 2007), and Tiffany v. eBay, 2008 WL 27557897 (S.D.N.Y. July 14, 2008)).

Trademark_bgTherefore at least in the area of keyword triggering, there is room for trademark enforcement although the issue is far from settled. From a practical standpoint, brand owners may have leverage to enforce trademark rights through a cease and desist letter and settlement agreement, avoiding costly litigation in a legal area that is currently unpredictable. And aggressive marketers may be amenable to limiting their use of competitors’ trademarks in Digital Marketing Insignia, rather than defending their positions in costly litigation which may swing either way. Presumably, the use of hashtags containing protected trademarks triggers a similar analysis to keyword search issues which have been heavily litigated. In addition, courts have long settled the issue of use of domain names containing protected trademarks in cybersquatting cases and the enactment of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) in the late 1990s.

Owners of registered trademarks can also work directly with websites that host infringing content. Most popular online platforms from Google and Bing to Twitter, Etsy, Amazon and YouTube have copyright and trademark complaint policies available for brand owners to pursue a take down action. Brand owners have these options to force competitors to comply, but trademark ownership and registration is usually a necessary requisite.


Today’s brands, whether on the cusp of launching their first assault, or fully engaged in the trenches of competitive warfare online, can use trademark law not only to police their marks in traditional ways, but also to monopolize an assortment of Digital Marketing Insignia and dominate the online real estate where consumers shop and engage with products. Without strategic trademark protection and enforcement as a major part of a marketer’s arsenal, a brand online will be fighting a losing battle and is sure to be on its way to steadfast annihilation in online search and discovery.

Screen Shot 2014-09-21 at 11.16.38 PMAuthor: David N. Sharifi, Esq. is a Los Angeles based intellectual property attorney and technology startup consultant with focuses in entertainment law, emerging technologies, trademark protection, and “the internet of things”. David was recognized as one of the Top 30 Most Influential Attorneys in Digital Media and E-Commerce Law by the Los Angeles Business Journal in 2014. Office: Ph: 310-751-0181;

Disclaimer: The content above is a discussion of legal issues and general information; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such without seeking professional legal counsel. Reading the content above does not create an attorney-client relationship. All trademarks are the property of L.A. Tech & Media Law Firm or their respective owners. Copyright 2013. All rights reserved. 

Search engine marketing graphic courtesy of Flickr _  Danard Vincente.


To discuss brand protection strategy with our expert legal team contact us to schedule a confidential consultation

Contact Form 310-751-0181

Posted in: