Amazon will stand trial for its 'confusing' search results

[tomm2thumbs]

Source: Engadget/ via Reuters

"Military" watchmaker MTM has been pursuing Amazon since 2011 and, despite losing in a California federal court, it's just won a 2-1 vote in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to have the case go to trial. <snip>

The argument MTM is making isn't that Amazon is simply offering alternatives to its wares -- it's that there's no indication that the site doesn't sell MTM products at all. Try it yourself: go to amazon.com, type in a search for "MTM watch," and see what comes up. We're getting 51 hits for the term, none of which are actually timepieces made by the company. Because of this, the Court of Appeals says "a jury could find that Amazon has created a likelihood of confusion."



Read more: http://www.engadget.com/2015/07/07/amazon-loses-mtm-court-of-appeals/

---

Going to be interesting how they spin their case

link for Reuter's coverage as well

[PoliticAverse]

1. I just searched for "MTM watch" on DU and I got a bunch of posts about the Mary Tyler Moore show.

Clearly another lawsuit in the making.

I don't see how you can hold a retailer responsible for search terms people type in.

The most I could see is requiring Amazon to put a "there was no exact match for your search term
here are some matches for products we think you might be interested in".

[drm604]

2. This will be interesting.

Search engines generally will return the closest result they can find. So if you search for "MTM Watch" and there are no watches of that brand available then it will fall back to showing just watches. That's just how search engines work.

That said, MTM certainly has a reasonable complaint. If they win, and perhaps they should, it may mean that there will have to be some major changes in search algorithms, at least on merchant sites, and quite possibly even search engines like Google, Yahoo, and Bing.

Maybe a disclaimer at the top of the search results would be sufficient.

[PoliticAverse]

3. How could MTM object if Amazon had a "we don't have any products that are an exact match...

to your search, however we think you might be interested in these products".

[drm604]

9. I don't see how they could object.

[Orrex]

4. "it's that there's no indication that the site doesn't sell MTM products at all."

Typo?

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. No; that is what MTM wants to see

Since Amazon doesn't sell MTM products, they want a search for 'MTM watch' to return "no such product found" or something similar.

The article says Amazon lost a similar case in the UK, for 'Lush Cosmetics' (even more surprising, since 'lush' is an adjective, and you could argue that a search for 'lush cosmetics' should return the same results as 'luxurious cosmetics' and so on). But Lush have made them put up a sign at the top saying 'we don't sell Lush Cosmetics'. Ironically, that is now inaccurate - 4th in the results list is "Lush Cosmetics Ocean Salt Face & Body Scrub, 8.8 Ounces by Lush" at the rip-off price of £93.01.

[Orrex]

6. Ah--got it. Thanks!

[drm604]

11. That would be difficult for Amazon to implement in a general sense.

Their search engine would have to recognize every brand in the world of every product and know that a brand is being asked for, as opposed to an adjective (like the example you give, "lush&quot .

There are probably many brand names that are adjectives or close spellings of adjectives.

[Jim Lane]

14. A name that's purely descriptive can't be protected as a trademark.

You could market coffee under the brand name Dark Coffee if you want but you couldn't stop another company from using "dark coffee" to describe its product.

[drm604]

15. According to the article they lost a case against Lush Cosmetics in the UK.

Lush is an adjective so apparently in the UK at least you can trademark an adjective and stop others from using it.

[Jim Lane]

16. I'm not saying no adjectives can ever be trademarks

I also don't know anything about UK law. In the US, you couldn't get trademark protection for "Pink Cosmetics" but you could for "Furious Cosmetics". The difference is that the latter couldn't be deemed descriptive. Thinking about "Lush Cosmetics" just off the top of my head, I can see an argument either way, and I don't know enough trademark law to give an informed opinion.

[FlaGranny]

8. Amazon searches

Last edited Wed Jul 8, 2015, 01:16 PM - Edit history (1)

will come up with a bunch of similar products, but doesn't say they don't carry the searched for product. It's always been that way I think. I was never confused by it, but maybe others are?

Edit: P.S. Their search engine does come up with the closest matches for items they don't carry.

[matt819]

10. Huh?

Does MTM sell watches on Amazon? If so, then the search results are weird. If not, well, the search results are also weird. When I search for stuff that isn't available, as often as not there will be some indication that that's the case.

Amazon and Google and others certainly have tremendous power in nudging search results where they want them to be, for any number of reasons.

[kickysnana]

12. Looking for bulk rolled gauze. Spent an hour trying to navigate Amazon

after eliminating other sources. Gave up and typed "medical supplies" and "free shipping" on google and got an amazon link, second entry. Went typed in "rolled gauze" on that site and found it 12 rolls for what Walmart charges 5 AND free shipping.

I had ordered this 2 times before but the search shipping options are only for Prime no longer site only free shipping. I even opened up the old order to try to see if I could find a way to get it for a reasonable amount but Amazon search did not locate this but Google did.????

[Sunlei]

13. Your search ""MTM watch"" did not match any products. < at TOP of amazon page.

MTM ammo boxes up and See all 13,140 results…

MTM watches does have a 'Sponsored Links'.

There are thousands of cheap watches for sale, MTM watches should spring for a sales listing.