Various big luxury brands have been trying for years to get courts to say that Google is somehow liable for trademark infringement if it sells ads based on people doing searches on trademarked keywords. Most courts have rejected this argument -- but there was one in France that accepted it
and sided with LVMH (owners of brands Louis Vuitton, Moet & Hennessey, among others). That case moved up
to the European Court of Justice, which had already suggested
that selling ads based on trademarked keywords shouldn't be considered infringing. I had thought, upon reading the BBC's coverage of the final decision, that the court had strongly agreed with Google by saying that it was not guilty of trademark infringement
, but it seemed odd that LVMH seemed to be claiming victory in the quote in that article, saying: "the ruling clarified the rules of online advertising."
Looking at other coverage of the ruling, it appears the BBC's explanation leaves out many of the important details. While it's true that the court found that Google was not guilty, it did say that Google needs to remove ads when companies complain
and that national courts can set their own rules on this topic. It's not a complete win for either party, but it does seem to give more control to big brands to block perfectly legitimate advertising.