Google Sues Online Marketing Co. In TM, False Ad Suit
By Y. Peter Kang Law360, Los Angeles (September 16, 2015, 4:15 PM ET) -- Google Inc. filed a trademark infringement suit in California federal court on Wednesday accusing an Internet marketing firm of falsely advertising its relationship with the search giant in its service and promotional calls, which Google says is damaging its brand. Local Lighthouse Corp. is accused of making both live and automated sales calls to potential customers touting its search engine optimization services and falsely claiming that it is a Google-certified company, a local Google affiliate or a “Google subcontractor” that will help customers’ businesses appear on the first page of search results.
“Defendant’s sales agents have made and continue to make various false and misleading claims during defendant’s telemarketing calls to confuse consumers regarding the true source or nature of defendant’s services and the relationship between Google and defendant,” the 11-page complaint states.
Following a number of complaints from customers who believed Google was behind the marketing calls, Google said it sent a letter to the company in July 2014 warning it not to misrepresent its relationship with Google. Local Lighthouse responded by saying it didn’t make robocalls and would look into the matter. After more complaints poured in, Google said it sent Local Lighthouse another warning letter in January.
“Despite Google’s communications with defendant, defendant has continued the false and misleading telemarketing calls to this day,” it said.
Google brings claims of trademark infringement, unfair competition and false advertising and seeks a preliminary and permanent injunction preventing Local Lighthouse from using its marks in connection with the marketing of its services.
Local Lighthouse is a defendant in at least six federal lawsuits filed in recent months, including four putative class actions over alleged robocalls in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, as well as a proposed class action alleging fraud in connection with its purported affiliation with Google.
A representative for Local Lighthouse did not immediately respond to a request for comment Wednesday. A page on the company’s website is titled, “LLH is not Google” and offers a disclaimer stating they are an independent third party for Google AdWords and do not claim to represent Google in any way.
Google is represented by Michael G. Rhodes, Brendan J. Hughes and Rebecca Givner-Forbes of Cooley LLP.
Counsel information for Local Lighthouse was not immediately available.
The case is Google Inc. v. Local Lighthouse Corp., case number 3:15-cv-04219, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
I made that post in February. Since then, they paid the BBB money to become accredited. Note that the complaints went up to 199 since February and they now have 22 negative reviews as well. One of the DCs has well over 2000 complaints but gets an A+ (also accredited). Pay to play, that is the BBB. I take their ratings with a grain of salt. but they are sometimes a good source of information.
Quite! As I understand it, the BBB awards a "positive" if the company merely RESPONDS. That response may well be utter gibberish (and probably is), but it is a RESPONSE.
The BBB has ZERO credibility as far as their rating go.
A good BBB rating doesn't mean a company is good. However, a bad BBB rating very likely means a company is bad. So there is some level of credibility that has value.
Even if a company has a good rating, it's still worth reading the complaints, and then seeing if the response is boiler-plate nonsense. I.e. complaints about telemarketing to DNC, but the response only offering to put them on their internal call list. In those cases, file with the BBB just to publicly document the issue, and then the FTC to push for some real action.
BBB is useful for getting info on the entities like alternate biz names, officers, years in biz, addresses, websites, phone numbers. Complaints section also often has useful tidbits, especially if u r planning to sue 'em.
I'm going to their office i Tustin to smash "CEO" Eric Oakley's face into the toilet and make sure he has all of his teeth and mandible flushed in his vomit.
It has been my experience that the tough talkers back off when they run up against someone who won't put up with their crap. Just a thought for ya'll to ponder.
Even outside the DNC complaints, when reading BBB nonsense, look at the total number of complaints. Look at the total # with an A+ rated company. The BBB does not generally review responses, and I suspect many responses are merely, "Go fluck yourself". With all the loopholes the BBB now offers merchants, the BBB is the proverbial "teats on a boar hog".
And read the positive reviews on Google and Yelp for examples of ditzy broads and surfer-dudes.
For "years in business", see some car dealers that have been around for 30, 40 years, then ask your neighbors (who have been in the area for a decade or more) about them.
As for suing, just remember that most corporations have high $$ lawyers on staff, not to tell them the law and how to comply with said law, but how to evade it and where the loopholes and weak-to-nonexistent enforcement is, and where the crony courts are.
Reply to topic