IBJNews

Angie's List accuses competitor of deceptive ads

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Angie’s List Inc. alleges in a federal lawsuit that its trademarked name is being misused by a Colorado competitor to intercept people conducting Google searches for the Indianapolis-based contractor-ratings service.

The lawsuit filed June 1 in U.S. District Court in Indianapolis alleges Golden, Colo.-based ServiceMagic Inc. bought advertisements, known as sponsored links, “intended to deceive Angie’s List members and potential members.”

Angie’s List’s complaint includes a screen shot of a Google ad, running below its own ad, titled, “Angie’s List Chicago – Bids from ServiceMagic Contractors.”

Underneath is the link to www.servicemagic.com.

The suit cites another sponsored link that runs near the top of the Google results page titled:  “Why Pay for Her List? Our Service is Free.” 

“ServiceMagic profits from attempting to lure away home owners who otherwise use or would use Angie’s List’s website,” states the complaint. “Angie’s List believes it has lost members and/or potential members to ServiceMagic and  … has incurred and continues to incur unnecessary and excessive expenses to combat and mitigate the effects” of the alleged misconduct.

Angie’s List also alleges that ServiceMagic, in a comparison table on its website,  inflated the monthly cost of Angie’s List service in the Denver market—at $13.75 instead of the actual $3.25.

The complaint alleges trademark infringement, unfair competition, trade disparagement, trademark dilution and unjust enrichment.

Angie's List seeks unspecified monetary damages and an injunction to stop ServiceMagic’s ads.

ServiceMagic only recently became aware of the suit, said its spokeswoman, Brooke Gabbert.  “I can’t comment on the lawsuit since the litigation is pending,” she said.

There’s nothing illegal, per se, about purchasing ad words or about comparative advertising, said Marshall Leaffer, a scholar in intellectual property law at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law.

But one issue is whether the use of the ad word causes confusion to consumers. “It’s how you use the ad word that’s critical,” said Leaffer.

Courts have generally held companies to the standard of whether a reasonably informed consumer can make distinctions and not be confused.  

Angie’s complaint makes several references to consumers being confused, saying ServiceMagic’s link “was intended to and likely to confuse members who saw the term ‘Angie’s List’ and quickly clicked on the link.”

But whether a court will buy such a claim is anybody’s guess. ServiceMagic’s web address is clearly visible below the sponsored ads’ headline.

The legal concept of “reasonably informed” consumer has changed over the past 20 years as newer forms of media emerge, such as advertising over the Internet.  Some rulings have recognized that “the Internet shopper is much more savvy,” Leaffer added.

Angie’s List, founded in 1995, has about 1.2 million paid members in 186 local markets.  It compiles ratings of contractors in hundreds of categories such as plumbers, automotive service and health care.  Members pay a subscription fee.

The company went public late last year and has been using proceeds on a television advertising blitz and to enter new markets.

ServiceMagic operates a website that connects consumers with 80,000 local service providers it says are screened and pre-approved.

The Colorado company claims nearly 4 million unique visitors to its website each month. Service Magic has purchased broadcast ads in the Indianapolis market.


 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Angie's List is a scam
    All business must pay Angie's list to be featured.....or they are forever buried. The reviews are far from real and the only operation the list wants is money from all sides. What a scam!
  • Extortion without representation
    It about time someone takes on the Angie's List deceptive practices of extortion of small business owners. They only take money from small business owners and create hope of sending them business. No advertisers can show a meaningful ROI on monies spent to advertise with Angie's List
  • Educate yourself
    The two posters above are terribly misinformed/uneducated on this topic!
    • The End
      Here comes the blame game! This always happens right before a company fails, the execs are finding excuses already. And right after all the insiders sold their shares......Typical Indiana white collar fraud - Been happening since Mitch Daniels took over
    • Angie's List
      Angie's list is a waste anyway. Who actually uses it? Companies place ads and I can bet there is no real return for 90% of the companies that have used Angie's list.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

    2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

    3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

    4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

    5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

    ADVERTISEMENT