India’s Delhi High Court ruled on May 22, 2026, that Google infringed trademark rights by allowing competitors to purchase trademarked brand names as advertising keywords — a decision that has since drawn vocal support from prominent Indian tech founders.
The case was brought by Hindware, a bathroom fittings manufacturer, after rivals used “Hindware” as a keyword in Google’s AdWords platform to target users searching for the brand. Justice Mini Pushkarna, in a 163-page judgment, rejected Google’s claim that it was a passive intermediary, finding instead that selling a trademark as a keyword for commercial gain without authorization violated India’s Trade Marks Act. The court awarded Hindware ₹3 million (approximately $31,600) in nominal damages.
The ruling gained wider attention after Zerodha founder Nithin Kamath and Zoho founder Sridhar Vembu publicly backed the decision. Kamath said Zerodha had faced the issue for over a decade, writing on X: “Whenever someone searches for ‘Zerodha,’ the traffic should rightfully come to Zerodha. But what often happens is that the first couple of results on Google Search are ads, leading the customer to a competitor’s website.”
Google said its ads policy “does not allow competitor advertisers to use trademarked terms in the ad-text of an ad” and that the policy applies globally. A company spokesperson added that Google looks forward to “continuing to align our operations with local legal frameworks.”
Legal experts cautioned that the ruling’s reach may be limited. Aprajita Rana, a partner at AZB & Partners, told TechCrunch the decision does not have a “far-reaching impact” on platform liability in India, as courts have already established that internet companies can lose legal protections when they actively participate in unlawful activity. She noted, however, that the case highlights how giving advertisers access to trademarked terms — even in automated, behind-the-scenes ad tools — could constitute participative conduct by a platform.
India is a significant market for Google, with more internet users than any country other than China, making the ruling potentially consequential for how the company structures its advertising practices in the region.
Source: TechCrunch