<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Court OKs Narrow Use of Competitor Trademarks in Search Ads &amp; Meta Tags</title>
	<atom:link href="http://searchengineland.com/court-oks-narrow-use-of-competitor-trademarks-in-search-ads-meta-tags-10217/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://searchengineland.com/court-oks-narrow-use-of-competitor-trademarks-in-search-ads-meta-tags-10217</link>
	<description>Search Engine Land: Must Read News About Search Marketing &#38; Search Engines</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:39:12 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ian McAnerin</title>
		<link>http://searchengineland.com/court-oks-narrow-use-of-competitor-trademarks-in-search-ads-meta-tags-10217/comment-page-1#comment-501</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian McAnerin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2007 05:25:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchengineland.com/beta/court-oks-narrow-use-of-competitor-trademarks-in-search-ads-meta-tags-10217.php#comment-501</guid>
		<description>Remember that this is a US ruling, not an international one. This is very much in line with current US and Canadian attitudes of fair dealing with trademarks, but very much at odds with the French and other jurisdictions.

But if you are restricting your geo-targeting to the US, then this is good news.

Ian
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Remember that this is a US ruling, not an international one. This is very much in line with current US and Canadian attitudes of fair dealing with trademarks, but very much at odds with the French and other jurisdictions.</p>
<p>But if you are restricting your geo-targeting to the US, then this is good news.</p>
<p>Ian</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dio Bach</title>
		<link>http://searchengineland.com/court-oks-narrow-use-of-competitor-trademarks-in-search-ads-meta-tags-10217/comment-page-1#comment-500</link>
		<dc:creator>Dio Bach</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2007 23:00:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchengineland.com/beta/court-oks-narrow-use-of-competitor-trademarks-in-search-ads-meta-tags-10217.php#comment-500</guid>
		<description>This is encouraging news, but I think there&#039;s still a lot of grey fudge around the issue. Does this mean Google AdWords will now free up all that lovely inventory it&#039;s sitting on due to the trademark issue? We can but hope.

I can&#039;t see it happening though until the law is clarified and tested a bit further. It&#039;s a step in the right direction though. :)
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is encouraging news, but I think there&#8217;s still a lot of grey fudge around the issue. Does this mean Google AdWords will now free up all that lovely inventory it&#8217;s sitting on due to the trademark issue? We can but hope.</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t see it happening though until the law is clarified and tested a bit further. It&#8217;s a step in the right direction though. :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
