A Marketing Plan, A Website Technology, Trademarked Key Words: Three Lawsuits Worth of Lessons

According to Boundless.com (n.d.), the growth of digital media has required lawmakers to reevaluate how traditional trademark, patent, and copyright laws can and should be applied to intellectual property in the realm of digital media, digital technology and digital media marketing.

“Social media and other digital technologies encouraging the sharing and re-purposing of content across different communication channels have introduced new difficulties in enforcing copyright, and inspired additional challenges to the basic legal philosophy of copyright. To protect their intellectual property both offline and online, businesses that rely heavily on copyright protection laws have advocated the extension and expansion of copyrights to the digital space (Boundless.com, n.d.).”

Understanding the value of intellectual property, protecting a brand’s intellectual property, and the legal precedents connected to intellectual property and matters such as marketing strategies, website technology, and search engine optimization, are essential in establishing a successful, ethical, and legal digital media marketing agency. Whether it is a Chihuahua Taco Bell marketing campaign, Amazon’s patented website technology, or protecting your brand name against a media giant such as Google, different intellectual property lawsuits all have one thing in common- they provide a deeper understanding of how to protect one’s intellectual property.

Taco Bell’s “Yo Quiero Taco Bell!” Campaign

In 1997, Taco Bell restaurants launched the chain’s most famous marketing campaign to date- a talking Chihuahua that exclaimed "¡Yo quiero Taco Bell! (Conley, 2014).” The famous dog was wildly popular for many, many years and was used in a wide variety of campaigns. In 2003, two Michigan men filed a lawsuit claiming ownership to the intellectual property that the Chihuahua campaign was based, and that thus, they were entitled to compensation (Conley, 2014). According to the men, they originally pitched the idea to Taco Bell but the restaurant stole the idea and then hired the TBWA agency to bring it to fruition. The men were subsequently awarded $30.1 million as the court agreed they should be compensated for their intellectual property (Conley, 2014). This case emphasizes the importance of a marketing company using only campaigns based on their own intellectual property and should proceed very cautiously when using an idea that could possible be attributed to someone else.

Amazon’s 1-Click Shopping Technology

Only two years after Taco Bell launched their Chihuahua campaign, online shopping giant was granted a patent for their 1-click shopping technology (Bostwick, 2009).  What seems like a simple button on a website has actually generated several patent disputes-including one against Barnes and Noble and their “Express Lane” technology just one month after Amazon was issued their patent (Bostwick, 2009). While the terms of the lawsuit against Barnes and Noble were not disclosed when the suit was settled in 2002, Amazon’s 1-click shopping website design demonstrates that a digital media company should not overlook protecting any proprietary aspect of their website (Bostwick, 2009). Do not underestimate the value of a unique aspect of your brand- regardless of how inconsequential it may seem at the time.

Google Trademark Keywords

Ten years after Amazon received their patent for their proprietary website technology, Google was ordered to continue in a lawsuit filed by “Rescuecom.” While the lower courts, originally discussed the lawsuit, the 2^nd US Circuit Courts issued its ruling in April of 2009 (Bostwick, 2009). Google’s keyword technology allows a brand to appear at the top of a Google search page when a consumer searches for a specific word or phrase related to that brand (Bostwick, 2009). In this particular lawsuit, Google was accused of selling “Rescuecom”- a trademarked name proprietary to “Rescuecom”- to the competitors of the brand. This allowed the competitors to appear on the results page when a consumer searched for the trademarked phrase (Bostwick, 2009). This is only one of multiple lawsuits in regards to the same predicament and stresses the importance of trademarking a brand’s intellectual property. Without having their name trademark, Rescuecom would have had no grounds in which to question Google’s practices. 

Each case offers a unique approach to the question of intellectual property from very unique perspectives through very unique circumstances. However, despite their differences, each one demonstrates the same key points- it is essential to protect a brand’s intellectual property, while remaining ever vigilant and ensuring that said property is not being used without proper permission, licensing, or compensation.