Delhi High Court Ruling Against Google Could Transform Online Advertising Rules in India
New Delhi: A significant ruling by the Delhi High Court has the potential to reshape the way online advertising functions in India. The court held Google responsible for permitting advertisers to use the trademarked term “HINDWARE” as a keyword in its advertising system without the consent of the brand owner.
The judgment, delivered by Justice Mini Pushkarna, concluded that the practice amounted to trademark infringement and an unfair commercial activity. As a result, Google has been directed to pay ₹30 lakh in damages to Hindware and has been restrained from allowing the company’s trademarked terms to be used within its advertising platform.
The case stemmed from two commercial suits filed by Hindware Limited against Google LLC and Google India Private Limited. The legal battle stretched over a decade before reaching its conclusion.
How the Dispute Began
The dispute dates back to 2013 and 2014 when Hindware, then operating as HSIL Limited, discovered that competing sanitaryware brands were using its trademark as a keyword through Google’s advertising programme.
According to court records, companies including Cera Sanitaryware Limited and Omkara Infoweb Private Limited purchased the keyword “HINDWARE” through Google Ads. As a result, advertisements linked to those companies appeared prominently when users searched for Hindware-related products on Google.
Although Hindware later settled its claims against the rival firms during the proceedings, Google continued to contest the matter, leading to a detailed judicial examination of its advertising practices.
Understanding Google’s Advertising Model
The court reviewed the functioning of Google Ads, formerly known as AdWords, under which advertisers pay to reserve specific keywords. When users search for those terms, sponsored advertisements are displayed at the top of search results.
The platform operates on a pay-per-click system, meaning advertisers are charged only when users click on their advertisements. In cases where multiple advertisers compete for the same keyword, Google conducts automated auctions to determine ad placement based on bids and relevance.
The judgment noted that Google’s policy in India allows advertisers to bid on trademarked keywords belonging to other companies. The court observed that stricter protections against such practices exist in certain international markets, including the European Union.
Court Rejects Google’s Jurisdiction Argument
Google argued that the Delhi High Court lacked jurisdiction because Hindware’s registered office is located in Kolkata. However, the court dismissed the objection.
Justice Pushkarna observed that Google’s services and advertisements are accessible throughout India, including Delhi. Since the disputed advertisements were visible within the national capital, the court held that a part of the cause of action arose there, giving the Delhi High Court authority to hear the matter under applicable provisions of the Trade Marks Act and the Code of Civil Procedure.
The court also highlighted Google’s active role in facilitating keyword auctions, entering advertising agreements and generating revenue from the process.
Google’s Defence Fails to Convince Court
Google maintained that keywords function only as invisible triggers in the backend and are not visible to users. Therefore, it argued that keyword usage should not be treated as trademark usage.
The company further stated that advertisers independently select keywords and create advertisement content, while Google merely provides the platform.
Google also relied on protections available to intermediaries under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, arguing that it should not be held responsible for third-party advertising content.
The court, however, rejected these arguments, concluding that Google was not acting as a neutral intermediary because it played an active role in offering, selling and facilitating the use of trademarked terms within its advertising ecosystem.
Trademarked Keywords Amount to Commercial Use, Says Court
On the central issue of trademark infringement, the court sided with Hindware.
Justice Pushkarna ruled that using a registered trademark as a keyword constitutes “use in advertising” under the Trade Marks Act, even if the keyword itself remains invisible to users.
The judgment stated that Google commercially benefited by selling and promoting trademarked terms to advertisers. The court noted that Google actively suggests, offers and auctions keywords, including trademarked words, making the activity a commercial use rather than a passive technical function.
The court further observed that “HINDWARE” is a distinctive and well-recognised trademark rather than a generic term. It also referenced the Delhi High Court’s earlier recognition of Hindware as a well-known trademark in 2017.
Permanent Restrictions and Compensation
Following its findings, the Delhi High Court permanently prohibited Google from using or allowing the use of terms such as “HINDWARE”, “HINDWARE SANITARYWARE”, “HINDWARE SANITARY”, and “HINDWARE SANITARYWARE INDIA” within its advertising programme.
The court awarded damages of ₹15 lakh in each of the two connected suits, taking the total compensation to ₹30 lakh. Google has been directed to pay the amount within eight weeks.
The ruling is being closely watched by businesses and legal experts as it could influence future policies governing keyword advertising and trademark protection in India’s digital marketplace.
Also Read: Indian-Origin Delta Pilot Killed in Helicopter Crash Hours After Tying the Knot