free html hit counter November 2004 - Page 5 of 7 - John Battelle's Search Blog

Blinkx 2.0 Launches

By - November 15, 2004

blinkx2 I’ve come to realize that one of the main reasons I have a Mac is so I don’t spend all day playing with new search tools (most of which are PC only), and instead I can focus on my supposed real job, which is writing the book (yes, I really am writing, I swear). To that end, I can’t speak to the new launch of Blinkx, but that’s OK, a lot of other folks can.

Release in extended entry.

Update: Om notes that there may be trouble in Blinkx land, a founder is out….

]]> Read More Read More

  • Content Marquee

Audience Match

By -

Fred also points us to Tacoda’s announcement of its Audience Match network, which is attempting to get publishers to share data so as to more precisely target audience intent over multiple content sites.

CBSMW Sold to Dow Jones

By -

Congrats to Larry Kramer and his team for building an asset, surviving the bubble, and hooking up with Dow Jones. Price: Nearly $500 million. NYT coverage.

Good analysis: Fred’s post. He used to be Chair of

Will Google Ban Trade in Trademarks?

By - November 13, 2004

amblinds.jpgI’m noticing enough buzz on the topic to merit bringing it up here – folks on the boards are talking about whether Google might ban the practice of bidding on trademarked terms. The original rumour came from a Google UK source, reported on Corante, first mentioned on Webmasterworld, the grandaddy of the SEM/SEO discussion boards.

From that thread:

A friend of mine attended a Google University seminar at Earls Court (London, UK) on Thursday last week. Apparently one of the guys from Google said that they were planning to phase out affiliate bidding on AdWords ‘very soon’. The reason – showing several ads for the same merchant reflects badly on the user’s experience.

I’m a full-time affiliate who primarily uses AdWords to send customers to the exact product page on a merchant’s website. If this is true quite frankly I’m in trouble. I called my account rep immediately in horror and he said he’d heard nothing of the sort. I would certainly hope Google would give plenty of warning if they were planning such a huge change.

The implications are significant here – the affiliate industry, which makes a lot f money arbitraging trademarked keywords, would be dramatically impacted. And Google stands to lose what may well be a significant revenue stream. But I sense there may be more at work here than merely “improving users’ experience.”

The UK information may be unfounded rumor, but the fact is, Google (and Overture) face a very serious threat from lawsuits over trademarked terms. In short, Geico (yup, owned by Google hero Warren Buffet) and American Blinds both have very serious complaints pending against Google, and both litigants are not going to go away. The cases are winding their way toward what could be a very public and very unpleasant discovery period.

Their beef? Competitors are buying their trademarked terms as AdWords and profiting from the confusion (ie other insurance companies were scooping up “Geico” as an AdWord, and driving customers to competing sites.) Interestingly, perhaps due to the fracas, there are no potentially infringing AdWords anymore on the term Geico, though a search for American Blinds still shows competitors attempting to make hay on that company’s name.

Google’s initial defense to these suits has been to claim that A/Google only uses trademarks in “internal computer algorithms to determine which ads to show,” and B/ that the “process is not visible to users and therefore can’t cause them to be confused as to the origin of goods or services displayed in the ads.” (More in this Cnet story, which I am quoting.)

This argument has been viewed with skepticism by the courts, which have ruled that Geico can go ahead and sue. As it girds for the fight, Google, which previously had been limiting the purchase of some trademarks on a sort of hand-rolled basis, altered their AdWords policy to let anyone bid on a trademarked term. While the official reason given for the change was “better results”, most legal observers I’ve spoken with say the real reason was legal consistency: you can’t be fighting the Gecio and American Blind lawsuits, claiming that you’re simply an intermediary, while at the same time protecting some trademarks.

What is not clear to me is whether the original source was claiming that Google was going to ban affiliate ads altogether – which would be a very large hit to revenues – or just the practice of affiliates using trademarked terms. In either case, Google could narrow or extend the policy with regard to competitors who buy their rivals’ keywords. It remains to be seen.

If Google does shift strategy and ban the use of trademarks in AdWords, the suits will clearly be moot, and the company will have avoided what could have been a damaging blow to their corporate image. After all, having the courts rule definitively that you’re profiting through an illegal practice is not exactly good business. Just ask Microsoft.

Tip of the Hat: Majestic Research.

Update: Good reading in response to this post and the original rumors: SEWblog.

AOL Goes For Travel

By - November 12, 2004

aolIt’s the last day of the Wall St. Journal’s free week, so I’ll point to its coverage of this story: “AOL Plans Service to Scour Internet for Travel Deals.” Yahoo has already made its intentions known in this space, and for my money, it’s only a matter of time before Google does as well.

AOL’s doing its deal with Kayak, which has been a Gary Price favorite for a long time.

America Online plans to enter the crowded online travel market early next year with a free service it claims will search dozens of Web sites for the best deals.

The move raises the profile of the new travel search-engine space. At least half a dozen sites, most of them launched in the past year, scour online travel agencies and Web sites of hotels, airlines and car-rental companies to find the best deals. AOL will work with closely held Kayak Software Corp., which launched a bare-bones airfare search in May at

Google Images: A Clever Fix

By - November 11, 2004

arafatRecall the earlier post about Google Images, which demonstrated that the index was rarely updated? Well, the folks at Google clearly were listening. When Sergey calls something embarrassing, something has to change. Now, when you query Google Images, you will see Google News images in your results. That’ll solve some of the problems, but it’s just a patch – news only archives 30 days, if memory serves. It’s quite clever, though.

Example: Arafat.

Thanks to Nathan for pointing to this.

Update: Google and others have pointed out that this has been happening since April and is not a reaction to recent events. My bad.

Fiddling with Results?

By -

evilsatanSEW points out that a search on the new MSFT beta engine for more evil than satan returns Google as #1, and explains this history – apparently Google did the same to MSFT back in 1999.

I find this disturbing in all sorts of ways. It shows that engineers at any search company not only *can* fiddle with results, but at times when they find it convenient or funny (or perhaps in other instances, good for their business in some way) they *will.* Not a good precedent, in my humble opinion.

UPDATE: Google called me to inform me that they did not fiddle back in 1999, that the “evil” query back then returned MSFT on its own…not surprisingly…also MSFT posts on its blog that the initial results that brought Google to #1 for “more evil than satan” were a MSFTbomb, ie, not an inside job. Well, at least, not an official inside job…