[ad_1]
Two Taiwanese domestic companies used search engine optimization (SEO) technology to incorrectly display specific brand names in search engine display results, leading consumers to mistakenly believe that stores sold branded products specific in order to promote their own website visit rates. The Fair Trade Commission ruled on April 12, 2022 that these behaviors violated Article 25 of the Fair Trade Law and imposed fines of 2 million and 800,000 New Taiwan dollars on the two companies, respectively.
The Fair Trading Commission stated that when consumers enter a specific brand into the Google search engine, that specific brand will appear in the search results. This result is produced by these companies through SEO techniques.
The Fair Trading Commission further explained that it is not opposed to SEO technology, but the presentation of search results should not have the effect of misleading consumers. When consumers search for information about a specific brand on the Google search engine, they may be attracted to such misleading texts. These behaviors are tantamount to luring consumers down the wrong street. This approach can not only increase the visitor rate of these companies’ website, but also attract consumers to compare or buy other branded products sold on these companies’ website, thus reducing the sales opportunities that the consumers want to search originally for branded products.
In the past, the Fair Trading Commission has found that using the company name or trademark of a competitor’s business as a keyword ad for a business, or juxtaposing the name or trademark of the competitor in the keyword advertisement violates Article 25 of Fair Trade. Act. Although this case does not directly use other companies’ product brands as keyword ads, the end result is essentially deceptive “bait-and-switch” behavior, as well as disrupting product searches and purchases usual of consumers. These behaviors also have the effect of unfair competition on other operators selling these branded products. If allowed to go unregulated, it may lead other competitors to imitate in the future, and it will then be more difficult for consumers to distinguish the authenticity of information presented in search results, thus threatening the competitive order of the market of electronic commerce and the interests of consumers. Therefore, the Fair Trade Association considered that the act constituted misleading and obviously unfair conduct sufficient to affect the order of the transaction and breached section 25 of the Fair Trade Act.
[ad_2]
Source link
