In a trademark judgment involving search engine Google and sanitaryware maker Hindware, the Delhi High Court has restrained Google LLC and Google India from using the mark/name ‘HINDWARE’, ‘HINDWARE SANITARYWARE’, ‘HINDWARE SANITARY’ or ‘HINDWARE SANITARYWARE INDIA’, or any combination thereof, as advertising keywords, AdWords or in any manner amounting to trademark infringement.
The court has also ordered Google LLC and Google India to pay Rs 30 lakh in damages, jointly and severally, to Hindware.
Justice Mini Pushkarna held Google liable for trademark infringement in relation to the use of Hindware’s registered trademark through its AdWords programme.
The dispute began after Hindware alleged that rivals Grohe and Cera were using its trademark as advertising keywords through Google’s platform, causing their websites to appear in sponsored search results.
Google India had opposed the suit on the ground that the Delhi High Court lacked territorial jurisdiction to hear Hindware’s pleas, arguing that the company’s registered office was located in Kolkata.
Rejecting Google’s objections, the court ruled in favor of Hindware.
The court found that companies were able to bid on Hindware-related keywords through Google’s AdWords programme, resulting in competing products appearing in sponsored search results when users searched for the Hindware trademark.
At the centre of the dispute was Google’s AdWords platform, which allows companies to pay for keywords linked to user searches. Hindware argued that its trademark was being used as an advertising keyword by rival brands.
Grohe and Cera later settled with Hindware, but Google chose to continue fighting the case.
According to media reports, the court also rejected Google’s defence that it was entitled to protection as an intermediary. It further held that the use of a trademark as a keyword to trigger advertisements can amount to trademark use in advertising, even if the trademark does not appear visibly in the advertisement itself.
The ruling comes as Google expands AI-powered Search, drawing fresh attention to how the company controls the systems that shape what users see online. While the case concerns Google’s advertising business rather than its generative AI products, it raises broader questions about platform responsibility in digital discovery and information systems.
Also Read: U.S. Supreme Court Declines Review, No Copyright Protection for AI-Generated Works
