How does the use of trademarks by third-party sellers affect online search?

Marketing Science

Volumn 31, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 819-837

  Chiou, Lesley ^a   Tucker, Catherine ^b,c  

^a OCCIDENTAL COLLEGE   (United States)

^b MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^c NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Online search; Search advertising; Trademarks

Indexed keywords

EID: 84867555620     PISSN: 07322399     EISSN: 1526548X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/mksc.1120.0724     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Anderson E, Jung H, Simester D (2010a) Competitive advertising dynamics: Switching costs and learning. Working paper, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
2. Anderson ET, Fong NM, Simester DI, Tucker CE (2010b) How sales taxes affect customer and firm behavior: The role of search on the Internet. J. Marketing Res. 47(2):229-239.
3. Bechtold S (2011) Google AdWords and European trademark law. Comm. ACM 54(1):30-32.
4. Bertrand M, Duflo E, Mullainathan S (2004) How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? Quart. J. Econom. 119(1):249-275.
5. Chiou L, Tucker C (2012a) How does pharmaceutical advertising affect consumer search? Working paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
6. Chiou L, Tucker C (2012b) Copyright, digitization, and aggregation. Working paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
7. Clemons E, Madhani N (2010-2011) Regulation of digital businesses with natural monopolies or third-party payment business models: Antitrust lessons from the analysis of Google. J. Management Inform. Systems 27(3):43-80.
8. Cohen D (1986) Trademark strategy. J. Marketing 50(1):61-74.
9. Cohen D (1991) Trademark strategy revisited. J. Marketing 55(3):46-59.
10. Cook TD, Campbell DT (1979) Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings (Rand McNally, Chicago).
11. Court of Justice of the European Union (2009) Advocate General Poiares Maduro considers that Google has not infringed trade mark rights by allowing advertisers to buy keywords corresponding to registered trade marks. Press release 75/09, CURIA, Luxemburg, http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2009-09/cp090075en.pdf.
12. Danaher PJ, Bonfrer A, Dhar S (2008) The effect of competitive advertising interference on sales for packaged goods. J. Marketing Res. 45(2):211-225.
13. De los Santos B, Kosovaz R, Koulayevx S (2012) Estimating price discrimination in the online distribution channel. Working paper, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
14. Ferraro EA (2008) Conducting marketing research with Amazon's Mechanical Turk. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
15. Goldfarb A, Tucker C (2011) Search engine advertising: Channel substitution when pricing ads to context. Management Sci. 57(3):458-470.
16. Goldfarb A, Tucker C (2012) Standardization, standards and online advertising. Working paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
17. Hursh P (2004) Search engines turning trademark law upside down. Search Engine Watch, (May 19) http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2067549/Search-Engines-Turning-Trademark-Law-Upside-Down.
18. Itti L (2005) Models of bottom-up attention and saliency. Itti L, Rees G, Tsotsos JK, eds. Neurobiology of Attention (Elsevier Academic Press, Amsterdam), 576-582.
19. Jainchill J (2010) Carnival brands' keyword rule gives rivals a boost. Travel Weekly (January 31) http://www.travelweekly.com/Cruise-Travel/Carnival-brands-keyword-rule-gives-rivals-aboost/.
20. Kent RJ, Allen CT (1993) Does competitive clutter in television advertising "interfere" with the recall and recognition of brand names and ad claims? Marketing Lett. 4(2):175-184.
21. Koch C, Ullman S (1985) Shifts in selective visual attention: Towards the underlying neural circuitry. Human Neurobiol. 4(4):219-227.
22. Krasnikov A, Mishra S, Orozco D (2009) Evaluating the financial impact of branding using trademarks: A framework and empirical evidence. J. Marketing 73(6):154-166.
23. Manning WG, Mullahy J (2001) Estimating log models: To transform or not to transform? J. Health Econom. 20(4):461-494.
24. Morrin M, Jacoby J (2000) Trademark dilution: Empirical measures for an elusive concept. J. Public Policy Marketing 19(2):265-276.
25. Morrin M, Lee J, Allenby GM (2006) Determinants of trademark dilution. J. Consumer Res. 33(2):248-257.
26. Mullahy J (1999) Interaction effects and difference-in-difference estimation in loglinear models. NBER Technical Working Papers 0245, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
27. O'Connor P (2007) An analysis of hotel trademark abuse in payper-click search advertising. Sigala M, Mich L, Murphy J, eds. Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2007 (Springer, Vienna), 377-388.
28. Park Y-H, Fader PS (2004) Modeling browsing behavior at multiple websites. Marketing Sci. 23(3):280-303.
29. Pfanner E (2010) Filching a good name for Internet use? New York Times (March 21) http://nytimes.com/2010/03/22/technology/zziht-brands.html.
30. Pho Cus Wright (2009) U.S. online travel overview, eighth edition. Technical report, PhoCusWright, Sherman, CT.
31. Pieters R, Wedel M, Zhang J (2007) Optimal feature advertising design under competitive clutter. Management Sci. 53(11):1815-1828.
32. Png IPL, Reitman D (1995) Why are some products branded and others not? J. Law Econom. 38(1):207-224.
33. Ripin PM (2007) Competitor keyword trademark bidding-Trademark infringement or fair competition? Technical report, Davidoff Malito & Hutcher LLP, New York.
34. Rosso MA, Jansen BJ (2010) Brand names as keywords in sponsored search advertising. Comm. Assoc. Inform. Systems 27:81-98.
35. Sayedi A, Jerath K, Srinivasan K (2012) Competitive poaching in sponsored search advertising and its strategic impact on traditional advertising. Working paper, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.
36. Vinhas AS, Anderson E (2005) How potential conflict drives channel structure: Concurrent (direct and indirect) channels. J. Marketing Res. 42(4):507-515.
37. Yang S, Ghose A (2010) Analyzing the relationship between organic and sponsored search advertising: Positive, negative, or zero interdependence? Marketing Sci. 29(4):602-623.
38. Zimmerman M (1999) Free ride?: Is advertising on search engines' "results" screens trademark infringement? Technical report, Fenwick & West LLP, Mountain View, CA.