Google V Accc

CLAW 6032

Regulating Innovation and Distribution

Assignment One

Google Inc v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission

Court: High Court of Australia

Judges: French CJ, Hayne, Heydon, Crennan and Kieffel JJ (unanimous decision)

Judgment Date: 6 February 2013

Facts

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) stated that between 2005 and 2008, Google had engaged in conduct that was likely to mislead or deceive through links presented on the results page of Google’s website. The ACCC argued that Google had as an advertiser, mislead and deceived users by displaying sponsored links to the websites STA travel, Carsales, Trading Post, and Ausdog.

Issue

When users searched for a competitors business e.g. Harvey World Travel, the result was that a sponsored link (advertisement) of STA Travel would appear before the organic search results. ACCC alleged that this was an attempt to divert web traffic away from the competitor, and to falsely represent a commercial alliance between the two businesses that appeared as a result of the search. Examples of this that were considered in the case were the Trading Post and Just 4x4s magazine, which Google was seen to be creating a misleading connection between the two businesses by displaying the sponsored Trading Post link when a search for Just 4x4s magazine was undertaken by the user. As Google’s own Adwords program generates these sponsored links, the advertiser specifies the web page to be included in the sponsored link, and the search terms that will generate the sponsored link. The advertisements in question were not authored by Google, nor were the resultant search queries that would generate the sponsored link made by Google.

Liability for sponsored links:

Argument made by ACCC

ACCC argued that Google was the maker and creator of the sponsored links, and that Google had utilised its technology to display the search requests made by users. Under s52 of the Trade...