Joe Marchelewsk, president of AIJ Communications. (Courtesy photo) It's Time for a Change With Attorney Pay-Per-Click Advertising
Without providing restrictions on attorney advertising when it comes to PPC, someone searching for a particular lawyer can be misled with some underhanded advertising.
September 11, 2020 at 07:00 AM
7 minute read
The State Bar of California currently has no rules limiting the use of an attorney's name when it comes to pay-per-click (PPC) advertising with Google. A PPC campaign allows a law firm to bid on a specific phrase, so that when someone types in "car accident lawyer" or "Los Angeles real estate attorney" the firm's ad appears at the top of the Search Engine Results Page (SERP).
This is not a problem when it comes to terms relevant to potential clients. However, there should absolutely be a restriction on using a specific attorney's name as a PPC term and currently, there are no restrictions. What this means is that if an attorney types in "attorney john doe" or "attorney jane doe" into Google, other attorneys can also bid on those attorney names as if they were generic terms. So, attorneys who have spent decades cultivating a practice, deepening their knowledge of the law and obtaining tremendous results on behalf of their clients can lose a client to someone who uses their name as if it were a consumer product.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
ABC's $16M Settlement With Trump Sets Bad Precedent in Uncertain Times
8 minute read
Trending Stories
- 1In Novel Oil and Gas Feud, 5th Circuit Gives Choice of Arbitration Venue
- 2Jury Seated in Glynn County Trial of Ex-Prosecutor Accused of Shielding Ahmaud Arbery's Killers
- 3Ex-Archegos CFO Gets 8-Year Prison Sentence for Fraud Scheme
- 4Judges Split Over Whether Indigent Prisoners Bringing Suit Must Each Pay Filing Fee
- 5Law Firms Report Wide Growth, Successful Billing Rate Increases and Less Merger Interest
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
