Saturday, April 20, 2024
HomeNewsAISEO implications of Google Bard & Bing ChatGPT's Hallucinogenic visions.

SEO implications of Google Bard & Bing ChatGPT’s Hallucinogenic visions.

I got a fairy significant Bard Hallucination today, but it changed as I modified the prompts.  The catalyst for my test related to a recent legal challenge which reminded me of a prior much bigger legal challenge.

There was in my opinion a ill-advised litigation attempt by a large corporation against Didit. (an unsuccessful attempt). So, I decided to see what Bard and ChatGPT had to say about the previous litigation.

I’ll keep the true case outcome a secret, but suffice it to say that the outcome was NOT any of the suggested FACTS spit out by Bard or Bing’s ChatGPT.  Given these hallucinations, I’ll be adding more grains of salt to all AI output for the forseeable future.

Note how changes in prompt at different times seem to impact the output!

Prompt #1: In 2001 there was lawsuit between Did-it.com, LLC and Overture. What were the claims and the outcome of the litigation?

BARD:

In 2001, Did-it.com, LLC sued Overture Services, Inc. for trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false advertising. Did-it.com alleged that Overture’s use of the term “Did-it” in its search engine results pages (SERPs) infringed on its trademark rights in the term “Did-it.” Did-it.com also alleged that Overture’s use of the term “Did-it” was likely to cause confusion among consumers, and that Overture’s false advertising claims that “Did-it” was a “leading search engine” were misleading.

Overture denied all of Did-it.com’s allegations, and the case went to trial in 2002. The jury found in favor of Did-it.com on all of its claims, and awarded Did-it.com damages of $10 million. Overture appealed the verdict, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the verdict in 2004.

The Did-it.com v. Overture case was a significant victory for trademark owners, and it helped to establish the principle that search engines can be liable for trademark infringement for the use of trademarks in their SERPs. The case also helped to clarify the law on false advertising claims in the context of search engines.

Here are some additional details about the case:

  • The case was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
  • The trial was held in 2002, and the jury returned a verdict in favor of Did-it.com in December 2002.
  • Overture appealed the verdict to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed the verdict in 2004.
  • The case was settled in 2005, with Overture agreeing to pay Did-it.com $10 million.

The Did-it.com v. Overture case is an important precedent for trademark owners, and it helps to protect the rights of trademark owners in the digital age.

Second Bing Try what was the outcome of the litigation between Did-it.com and Overture?:

The litigation between Did-it.com and Overture was a landmark case in the development of search engine marketing (SEM). Did-it.com, a small search engine company, accused Overture, a dominant SEM company, of using its market power to engage in unfair trade practices.

The case centered on Overture’s practice of bidding on keywords that were trademarked by Did-it.com. For example, if a user searched for the keyword “Did-it.com,” Overture would display an ad for its own search engine. Did-it.com argued that this practice was unfair because it misled consumers into thinking that Overture’s search engine was affiliated with Did-it.com.

In 2006, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California found in favor of Did-it.com. The court held that Overture’s practice of bidding on trademarked keywords was a form of trademark infringement. The court also found that Overture had engaged in unfair competition by misleading consumers.

Overture appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. In 2008, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision. The Ninth Circuit held that Overture’s practice of bidding on trademarked keywords was a form of trademark infringement and that it had misled consumers.

The Ninth Circuit’s decision was a major victory for Did-it.com and for other small businesses that rely on SEM to reach customers. The decision established that SEM companies cannot use their market power to engage in unfair trade practices.

The litigation between Did-it.com and Overture also had a significant impact on the SEM industry. The decision forced SEM companies to change their practices. As a result, SEM companies are now more careful about bidding on trademarked keywords and about avoiding misleading consumers.

GPT via Bing

ChatGPT had no response. Interesting.

LATEST ARTICLES

Related Articles