Rosetta Stone v. Google Appeal: Google Files Unredacted Brief, Reveals Rosetta's AdWords Info

An unsealed Google brief in Rosetta Stone Appeal shows baselessness of original redactions. The case, in which Rosetta Stone accused Google of infringement for allowing others to use its trademarks as keywords to trigger the display of their AdWords ads, is currently being appealed by Rosetta Stone. The trial court judge issued a summary judgment […]

An unsealed Google brief in Rosetta Stone Appeal shows baselessness of original redactions. The case, in which Rosetta Stone accused Google of infringement for allowing others to use its trademarks as keywords to trigger the display of their AdWords ads, is currently being appealed by Rosetta Stone. The trial court judge issued a summary judgment in favor of Google in March of 2010.

  • It's interesting to note that between July 2007 and March 2010, Rosetta Stone "made more than $27 million from orders placed by customers who used Google paid and organic referrals." It also received 330,796 orders from Google ads.
  • Rosetta's customers take 2-4 weeks to make a purchasing decision of its software.
  • Google helped Rosetta catch fraudsters involved with credit card fraud and counterfeiting. Rosetta' even praised Google's Trust and Safety team to the FBI.
  • Rosetta' may be embarrassed by one particular element revealed in the unredacted brief. A 2005 survey of the general Internet population found that unaided recognition of "Rosetta Stone' was less than 2%, and aided recognition rose only to 13%.

The unredacted version of the Google brief in the case was made public after a push by consumer group Public Citizen and trademark attorneys Eric Goldman and Paul Levy of Public Citizen wrote blog posts about the unredacted document. Levy said Google's counsel told him that the redactions were made at the insistence of Rosetta Stone.

[tags]credit card,attorneys,rosetta stone[/tags]

[Via]