Is It Okay to Buy Your Competitor's Company Name for Your Search Campaign?

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided not to take up a trademark dispute between two personal injury law firms—Lerner & Rowe and Accident Law Group. The conflict stemmed from Accident Law Group using “Lerner & Rowe” as a keyword in Google search ads. Lerner & Rowe claimed this practice misled potential clients and infringed on their trademark.

Claims of Consumer Confusion

In its lawsuit, Lerner & Rowe pointed to 236 phone calls received by Accident Law Group from people who referenced Lerner & Rowe, suggesting those callers were confused by the ads. The firm argued this was proof that the advertising strategy was misleading and unfairly capitalized on their brand recognition.

Lower Courts Rule in Favor of the Rival

Despite Lerner & Rowe’s claims, the Arizona district court and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the case. The appeals court emphasized that internet users are generally savvy enough to tell the difference between a paid ad and organic search results, especially on clearly labeled search pages. They also noted that 236 confused calls was a small number compared to the 100,000+ ad impressions the campaign generated.

Lerner & Rowe’s Final Appeal Falls Flat

After losing in the lower courts, Lerner & Rowe appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that Accident Law Group’s keyword strategy misused their brand’s goodwill and misled consumers. They claimed it functioned as a “bait and switch” tactic, leading users to believe the two firms were connected. However, Accident Law Group defended the practice as a widely used and legitimate marketing approach.

No Further Review from the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court declined to hear the case, a move that effectively ends the legal battle. As is typical, the Court did not provide a reason for its decision. This outcome leaves the 9th Circuit’s ruling intact, reinforcing the legality of competitive keyword advertising, at least under current U.S. law.

What This Means for Digital Marketers

For businesses, especially those in competitive industries, this case sets a clear example: using a rival’s name in paid search ads remains a legally accepted practice. However, while the courts see consumers as capable of distinguishing ads from organic results, brands should still weigh the potential reputational risks of aggressive marketing tactics.

Cate Bender, the author, is Project Coordinator of Marketing Keys