The managing director of Webgains investigates the possible impacts of Google's recent moves and asks: what are the implications for players in the digital arena?

Google recently announced that trade marketing disagreements (effectively disputes between who has the right to use a branded keyword) will no longer be investigated in the U.K. and Ireland from the 5th May. Specifically:

• It will be possible to create new AdWord campaigns, including trademarked keywords. 
• Trademarked keywords will become active in campaigns where Google editorial policy has previously disabled them.
• Trademarked terms will be still restricted within ad text, though the investigation will be a 'limited courtesy investigation'.

Google argues that the changes are made with the consumer in mind. The logic is that by opening up bidding on brand terms, a wider range of products and services will gain exposure, ultimately facilitating cost savings because cheaper alternatives will also be displayed. Without doubt, this change will open up the AdWord experience to a proliferation of products and services.

For Google this change will have a positive direct impact on their bottom line, but what are the implications for players in the digital space, in particular those involved in affiliate marketing -- advertisers, affiliate managers of brands, advertising agencies, affiliates and affiliate networks like Webgains?

Advertisers and their affiliate managers
Presumably, competitors will now be able to take advantage of the open keyword policy to bid using rival brands as keywords. This raises many interesting issues. Will a brand have to take legal action to protect rights over its own property, an asset in which the owner has potentially invested significantly in order to build? Will we see a rise in lawsuits in the future over this? Is it ethical for competitors to make unauthorized use of rival keywords? Should the online industry be proposing policy guidelines, in the absence of Google's own regulation?

Is this an opportunity for industry-specific sectors to self-regulate, with non-binding agreements not to promote using another's brand, to limit the temptation to exploit a competitor's property?

On the other hand, there will be some distinct opportunities. There are some impressive 'small brands' out there that will be able to leverage their AdWord spend by using more well-known competitor terms, giving them enhanced exposure in front of their target audience.

Advertisers may also need to reconsider their search strategy. Whereas previously they could rely on Google to protect their brand as a registered trademark, now they may need to invest in a paid search strategy in order to secure the ad spaces for their own brand terms. At the very least, they will need to invest in optimizing the parameters that dictate page rank for organic search, with the aim of occupying the premier positions.

There is also the potential for increased competition for brand keywords to raise the overall spends needed to drive a certain level of traffic -- something Google clearly is hoping for. Whether this will result in increased search budgets or just reduced traffic remains to be seen. It is difficult to imagine advertisers reducing their reliance on the online channel and we may well see even more budget being switched across from off-line.

Affiliates
There seems to be even more opportunity than before to direct affiliates to authorised brand promotion. The use of branded landing pages by affiliates can increase the amount of ad slots dedicated to that brand and effectively eliminate display of competitor brands on the primary search pages. As affiliates become brand guardians, trust and respect becomes more critical than ever.

However, there is a real fear among affiliates that despite the Google changes opening up the marketplace to allow access to brand bidding, advertisers will still dictate restrictive practices via their terms and conditions. This, of course, is an advertiser's right, though many affiliates would argue that an affiliate spending his own money should be able to promote a brand more effectively and more cheaply that an agency spending an advertiser's money. Moreover, if an advertiser does not clearly communicate, up front, the detailed restrictions on brand bidding, there is room for confusion and conflict about what constitutes a valid transaction. Affiliates worry that unscrupulous or inattentive advertisers will take advantage of the changed circumstances and refuse to pay for valid sales on the basis that an uncommunicated policy was already in place. 

For closed brand bidding groups, the changed situation should make little difference. Advertisers will still be able to prevent brand bidding by the wider affiliate community via their terms and conditions, whilst allowing a select group of trusted affiliates to promote their brands.

Affiliate networks
With Google restrictions on brand bidding being lifted, the setting and policing of brand use guidelines will become a major focus for affiliate managers, networks and agencies. Most advertiser policies will need to be reviewed and significant resource devoted to ensuring compliance. Webgains, along with some other networks, offers brand monitoring tools to enable efficient surveillance of brand use. We can see that more development will be required to keep this moving forward.

Google has made several unilateral changes over the last few years, which have had a significant impact on the digital space. Often the impact of these changes is not immediate, but they do significantly influence the way we all work within the digital marketing space. By acting as the intermediary between advertisers and affiliates, affiliate networks are best placed to protect both parties' interests in these fast-changing times.

Robert Glasgow is managing director, Webgains.