I've only 2 days ago finished setting up a website for a client- www.partyshoots.co.uk And after doing a bit of research into SEO, I found the site that I had to compete against in Google- photoshootparty.co.uk So I used my normal software to generate some keywords & phrases to use in the meta keywords & description, competing against that site. Now- Today my client has informed me that he's had a call from a 'solicitor' claiming that his client is the 'original photoshoot party' and that that term should be removed from the partyshoots website. This is a term I've used in the META description of Partyshoots.co.uk, and from what I am aware- I can write whatever I wish in there as that term doesn't have a registered trade mark next to it? I've advised my client to ask the 'solicitor' to send him a letter explaining exactly what he's trying to say as it seems like utter nonsense to me. Does anyone have any info they're willing to provide about the legalities of this? It's got right up my nose and just made me even more determined to make the partyshoots website do better in the search engines than its competitors! Best of all- I've not even submitted the site to the search engines yet and it's not been indexed, so this 'solicitor' must be very much on the ball! Any help or advice welcome here.
In the US, trademark do not need to be registered. In the UK, I believe they have similar protection known as "Passing off". There are been a number of lawsuits over metatags - some successful, others not. Whether or not they would win or be awarded damages is unknown, but they could certainly file a lawsuit. Your client really need to get proper legal advice.
Seeing as you are in the UK I can advise you on the UK position on this. Like the previous poster mentioned, there has been cases on META tags. Up until quite recently the use of a proprietors trade mark was considered quite censurous. Namely because of the obvious exploitative nature of the the users intention to try and deceive users. However, as legal understanding evolves and adapts to technology, the "big wigs" have become to appreciate that a finding of trade mark infringement for use of a mark in META tags is quite inconsistent with the law. I shan't go into the details but firstly consider : 1) Meta tags are invisible use. The user does not see them at all. 2) Google doesn't even use META tags in displaying anything or ranking. The hot topic now is use of a proprietors trade mark as a keyword, by a third party (who holds no right the intellectual property right) in networks such as AdWords. This again is an invisible use, but totally different to the META tag contention. Anyway, back to your actual point. Can you use the term "Original Photo Shoot party" in the META tags. Absolutely. You have however copied the meta tags in its entirety. However again... this usage would be permissible, although slightly pointless. I don't understand under what basis they are contesting you to discontinue using the term "Original Photo Shoot party". They don't hold any trade mark in this phrase. Its highly descriptive. "Original" has several different meanings, not limited just to the first concept that he is reffering to. Overall, he has no basis for requesting you to discontinue using it.
Thank you both very much for your input regarding the matter. I've advised my client to ask the 'solicitor' to send a letter outlining what he is saying. Whether or not it was actually a solicitor, and if the letter ever comes through or not- I'll keep you updated as I have no intention of removing any of the META details from the site at this time, and my client is agreeing to stand by me on the matter. Thanks again for your help- It's put my mind at ease.
Some possibly relevant reading: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/09/google-does-not-use-keywords-meta-tag.html http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2009/09/google_confirms.htm