How Does the Use of Trademarks by Third-Party Sellers Affect Online Search?

References

• Anderson E, Jung H, Simester D. Competitive advertising dynamics: Switching costs and learning. (2010a) . Working paper, Northwestern University, Evanston, ILGoogle Scholar
• Anderson ET, Fong NM, Simester DI, Tucker CE. How sales taxes affect customer and firm behavior: The role of search on the Internet. J. Marketing Res. (2010b) 47(2):229–239Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bechtold S. Google AdWords and European trademark law. Comm. ACM (2011) 54(1):30–32Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bertrand M, Duflo E, Mullainathan S. How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? Quart. J. Econom. (2004) 119(1):249–275Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chiou L, Tucker C. How does pharmaceutical advertising affect consumer search? (2012a) . Working paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
• Chiou L, Tucker C. Copyright, digitization, and aggregation. (2012b) . Working paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
• Clemons E, Madhani N. Regulation of digital businesses with natural monopolies or third-party payment business models: Antitrust lessons from the analysis of Google. J. Management Inform. Systems (2010–2011) 27(3):43–80Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen D. Trademark strategy. J. Marketing (1986) 50(1):61–74Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen D. Trademark strategy revisited. J. Marketing (1991) 55(3):46–59Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cook TD, Campbell DT. Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings (1979) (Rand McNally, Chicago) Google Scholar
• Court of Justice of the European Union Advocate General Poiares Maduro considers that Google has not infringed trade mark rights by allowing advertisers to buy keywords corresponding to registered trade marks. (2009) . Press release 75/09, CURIA, Luxemburg, http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2009-09/cp090075en.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Danaher PJ, Bonfrer A, Dhar S. The effect of competitive advertising interference on sales for packaged goods. J. Marketing Res. (2008) 45(2):211–225Crossref, Google Scholar
• De los Santos B, Kosovaz R, Koulayevx S. Estimating price discrimination in the online distribution channel. (2012) . Working paper, Cornell University, Ithaca, NYGoogle Scholar
• Ferraro EA. Conducting marketing research with Amazon's Mechanical Turk. (2008) . Unpublished master's thesis, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UKGoogle Scholar
• Goldfarb A, Tucker C. Search engine advertising: Channel substitution when pricing ads to context. Management Sci. (2011) 57(3):458–470Link, Google Scholar
• Goldfarb A, Tucker C. Standardization, standards and online advertising. (2012) . Working paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
• Hursh P. Search engines turning trademark law upside down. (2004) . Search Engine Watch, (May 19) http://searchengine-watch.com/article/2067549/Search-Engines-Turning-Trademark-Law-Upside-DownGoogle Scholar
• Itti L, Itti L, Rees G, Tsotsos JK. Models of bottom-up attention and saliency. Neurobiology of Attention (2005) (Elsevier Academic Press, Amsterdam) 576–582Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jainchill J. Carnival brands' keyword rule gives rivals a boost. Travel Weekly (2010) January 31). http://www.travelweekly.com/Cruise-Travel/Carnival-brands'-keyword-rule-gives-rivals-a-boost/Google Scholar
• Kent RJ, Allen CT. Does competitive clutter in television advertising “interfere” with the recall and recognition of brand names and ad claims? Marketing Lett. (1993) 4(2):175–184Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koch C, Ullman S. Shifts in selective visual attention: Towards the underlying neural circuitry. Human Neurobiol. (1985) 4(4):219–227Google Scholar
• Krasnikov A, Mishra S, Orozco D. Evaluating the financial impact of branding using trademarks: A framework and empirical evidence. J. Marketing (2009) 73(6):154–166Crossref, Google Scholar
• Manning WG, Mullahy J. Estimating log models: To transform or not to transform? J. Health Econom. (2001) 20(4):461–494Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morrin M, Jacoby J. Trademark dilution: Empirical measures for an elusive concept. J. Public Policy Marketing (2000) 19(2):265–276Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morrin M, Lee J, Allenby GM. Determinants of trademark dilution. J. Consumer Res. (2006) 33(2):248–257Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mullahy J. Interaction effects and difference-in-difference estimation in loglinear models. (1999) . NBER Technical Working Papers 0245, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MACrossref, Google Scholar
• O'Connor P, Sigala M, Mich L, Murphy J. An analysis of hotel trademark abuse in pay-per-click search advertising. Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2007 (2007) (Springer, Vienna) 377–388Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park Y-H, Fader PS. Modeling browsing behavior at multiple websites. Marketing Sci. (2004) 23(3):280–303Link, Google Scholar
• Pfanner E. Filching a good name for Internet use? New York Times (2010) March 21). http://nytimes.com/2010/03/22/technology/zziht-brands.htmlGoogle Scholar
• PhoCusWright U.S. online travel overview, eighth edition. (2009) . Technical report, PhoCusWright, Sherman, CTGoogle Scholar
• Pieters R, Wedel M, Zhang J. Optimal feature advertising design under competitive clutter. Management Sci. (2007) 53(11):1815–1828Link, Google Scholar
• Png IPL, Reitman D. Why are some products branded and others not? J. Law Econom. (1995) 38(1):207–224Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ripin PM. Competitor keyword trademark bidding—Trademark infringement or fair competition? (2007) . Technical report, Davidoff Malito & Hutcher LLP, New YorkGoogle Scholar
• Rosso MA, Jansen BJ. Brand names as keywords in sponsored search advertising. Comm. Assoc. Inform. Systems (2010) 27:81–98Google Scholar
• Sayedi A, Jerath K, Srinivasan K. Competitive poaching in sponsored search advertising and its strategic impact on traditional advertising. (2012) . Working paper, Carnegie Mellon University, PittsburghCrossref, Google Scholar
• Vinhas AS, Anderson E. How potential conflict drives channel structure: Concurrent (direct and indirect) channels. J. Marketing Res. (2005) 42(4):507–515Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yang S, Ghose A. Analyzing the relationship between organic and sponsored search advertising: Positive, negative, or zero interdependence? Marketing Sci. (2010) 29(4):602–623Link, Google Scholar
• Zimmerman M. Free ride?: Is advertising on search engines' “results” screens trademark infringement? (1999) . Technical report, Fenwick & West LLP, Mountain View, CAGoogle Scholar