Whether use of someone else's sign as a keyword on Google is contrary to generally acceptable business practice
Supreme Court judgment 14 December 2021, HR-2021-2479-A, (case no. 21-083128SIV-HRET), civil case, appeal against judgment.
Komplett Bank ASA, Ikano Bank AB (publ), Norway Branch, BRAbank ASA (Counsel Gunnar Meyer), Virke (intervener) (Counsel Anders Aasland Kittelsen) v. Bank Norwegian ASA (Counsel Jan Magne Langseth) (Assisting counsel Christian Henrik Prahl Reusch), Google LLC (intervener) (Counsel Henrik Felix Reimers)
Justices: Falkanger, Bergsjø, Arntzen, Høgetveit Berg, Steinsvik
A bank that offered consumer loans in the private market had paid for keywords that responded to the corporate name of other banks in the same market on the search engine Google. When searching these keywords, an ad would then appear for this bank. As the Court of Appeal concluded, this advertising practice did not violate the general clause in section 25 of the Marketing Control Act. It was pointed out that the European Court of Justice had assessed similar advertising practices based on trademark law in several cases, and concluded that the use of someone else's sign in search engine advertising did not involve trademark infringement. Based on the case law of the European Court of Justice and the balancing of interests made under the trademark set of rules, there was no reason to prohibit the practice as contrary to good business practice under section 25 of the Marketing Control Act.