Comments on: Keyword “piggybacking” coming to Mobile Channel? http://insidemobilemarketing.com/archives/43 Commentary on tactics, trends and technology in Mobile Marketing Wed, 19 Nov 2008 04:20:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Marketing Direct Mail Marketing Add Link http://insidemobilemarketing.com/archives/43#comment-25 Marketing Direct Mail Marketing Add Link Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:54:46 +0000 http://insidemobilemarketing.com/?p=43#comment-25 <strong>Marketing Direct Mail Marketing Add Link...</strong> I didn't agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me... Marketing Direct Mail Marketing Add Link…

I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me…

]]> By: reicher http://insidemobilemarketing.com/archives/43#comment-16 reicher Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:26:16 +0000 http://insidemobilemarketing.com/?p=43#comment-16 In practice, I believe it would depend on the content being delivered from that keyword to determine if it was trademark infringement or an attempt at misleading a consumer. For example: Texting 'holidayinn' to a shortcode dedicated to directions or price comparison may return a list of different hotels and directions to holidayinn competitors in the area. This however is not considered trademark infringement. All self-service keyword providers SHOULD 100% have policies against 'Txtsquatting' i.e. using a keyword that is trademarked to deliver a alternative misleading message or to sell premium content not related to the mark. Fortunately, all keyword providers have the ability to turn off any keyword if they find a txtsquatter or abuse is reported. This would render all promotional material to be useless by the textsquatter. In a google world, since you only pay when someone clicks your ad, getting shut off is no big deal since its digital. With Shortcode/Keywords, any printed, televised, recorded radio, or signage promotional material will be rendered useless if your keyword is shut off(this would be a major loss of $ mid-campaign). Therefore I do not think many marketers will take the chance of losing money by txtsquatting. In practice, I believe it would depend on the content being delivered from that keyword to determine if it was trademark infringement or an attempt at misleading a consumer.

For example:
Texting ‘holidayinn’ to a shortcode dedicated to directions or price comparison may return a list of different hotels and directions to holidayinn competitors in the area. This however is not considered trademark infringement.

All self-service keyword providers SHOULD 100% have policies against ‘Txtsquatting’ i.e. using a keyword that is trademarked to deliver a alternative misleading message or to sell premium content not related to the mark.

Fortunately, all keyword providers have the ability to turn off any keyword if they find a txtsquatter or abuse is reported. This would render all promotional material to be useless by the textsquatter. In a google world, since you only pay when someone clicks your ad, getting shut off is no big deal since its digital. With Shortcode/Keywords, any printed, televised, recorded radio, or signage promotional material will be rendered useless if your keyword is shut off(this would be a major loss of $ mid-campaign). Therefore I do not think many marketers will take the chance of losing money by txtsquatting.

]]>