Home / Current Issue / Paper 1716471
A Doctrinal Study of Trademark Infringement in India’s Keyword Economy
Subject area: Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities · Area of research: Trademark Infringement in Digital Economy
DOI: https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV9I10-1716471
Abstract
This paper examines how keyword advertising has unsettled established trademark law in India, and what courts have done about it. Search engine marketing now sits at the centre of digital commerce, but the legal concepts designed to govern trademark use — particularly "commercial use" and "likelihood of confusion" — were not built with invisible algorithmic triggers in mind. The study traces the shift in Indian jurisprudence from the rigid, visibility-driven approach in Consim Info to the functional approach established in Google v. DRS Logistics. Drawing on Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the safe harbour provisions under Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000, it identifies a clear judicial movement toward the "informed user" standard. The paper ends by proposing a regulatory approach that gives trademark owners meaningful protection without closing the keyword market to fair competition.
Keywords
Keyword Advertising, Trademark Infringement, Section 29 Trade Marks Act, Initial Interest Confusion, Intermediary Liability, Section 79 IT Act, Google Ads Jurisprudence, Digital Marketing Law India.
How to cite this paper
@article{1716471,
author = {Poonam Sharma},
title = {A Doctrinal Study of Trademark Infringement in India’s Keyword Economy},
journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
year = {2026},
volume = {9},
number = {10},
pages = {1937-1940},
issn = {2456-8880},
url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1716471.pdf},
abstract = {This paper examines how keyword advertising has unsettled established trademark law in India, and what courts have done about it. Search engine marketing now sits at the centre of digital commerce, but the legal concepts designed to govern trademark use — particularly "commercial use" and "likelihood of confusion" — were not built with invisible algorithmic triggers in mind. The study traces the shift in Indian jurisprudence from the rigid, visibility-driven approach in Consim Info to the functional approach established in Google v. DRS Logistics. Drawing on Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the safe harbour provisions under Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000, it identifies a clear judicial movement toward the "informed user" standard. The paper ends by proposing a regulatory approach that gives trademark owners meaningful protection without closing the keyword market to fair competition.},
keywords = {Keyword Advertising, Trademark Infringement, Section 29 Trade Marks Act, Initial Interest Confusion, Intermediary Liability, Section 79 IT Act, Google Ads Jurisprudence, Digital Marketing Law India.},
month = {April},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV9I10-1716471}
}