Delhi High Court Rules Against Google in Trademark Keyword Case

The Delhi High Court has ruled against Google in a long-standing legal battle, determining that the company’s practice of allowing advertisers to bid on trademarked terms as keywords constitutes trademark infringement [1]. Justice Mini Pushkarna ordered Google to pay ₹30 lakh in damages and permanently restrained the tech giant from permitting the use of the "HINDWARE" trademark in its advertising program [1, 2].

Key takeaways

• The court ruled that using a trademark as a hidden keyword for advertising constitutes "use in advertising" under the Trade Marks Act [1].
• Google was ordered to pay ₹30 lakh in damages and litigation costs within eight weeks [1, 2].
• The judgment rejected Google’s defense that it acted as a neutral intermediary, noting the company actively suggests and auctions trademarked terms [1, 2].
• The court permanently restrained Google from allowing the use of "HINDWARE" and related variations as keywords in its advertising system [1, 2].

Trademark infringement and the AdWords model

The dispute originated from lawsuits filed by Hindware Limited, which discovered in 2013 and 2014 that competitors were purchasing the "HINDWARE" keyword through Google’s AdWords program [1]. This practice caused advertisements for rival sanitaryware firms to appear at the top of search results whenever users searched for the Hindware brand [2]. While Hindware initially pursued other companies involved in the bidding, those parties settled, leaving Google to contest the case through a full trial [1, 2].

Google argued that it should not be held liable because keywords function as invisible backend triggers rather than visible content [1]. The company further contended that it acts merely as a platform for advertisers, invoking protection under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act [1]. However, the court rejected these arguments, finding that Google is not a passive intermediary [2]. Justice Pushkarna noted that Google actively facilitates the process by suggesting trademarked keywords through its planning tools, conducting real-time auctions, and earning revenue from the resulting clicks [1, 2].

Why it matters

The ruling highlights a significant divergence in how Google manages trademark policies globally, as the court noted the company follows stricter regulations in the European Union than it does in India [1]. By classifying the sale of trademarked keywords as a commercial use of a brand, the judgment challenges the operational model of Google’s advertising auctions [1]. The court’s decision establishes that Google’s active involvement in the bidding and auctioning process creates an independent cause of action, potentially setting a precedent for how other trademark holders may challenge similar advertising practices in the future [1].