One search engine marketing technique is to bid on a competitor's branded terms, so that a search for their name will bring up your company in the results - and one blogger has been explaining the pros and cons of this.

Google allows this way of getting higher search engine rankings because it means searchers get relevant results, and the courts have ruled in their favour, explains Michelle Stern, a client services director at iProspect.

It also means Google gets more cash, because an advert position is based on the bid and the relevance to the search, so when there's no relevancy more has to be paid.

Ms Stern points out that users searching branded terms are "typically at or near the end of their purchase decision process" meaning there is value in appearing in search results.

And assessing risk is important: "You need to realise that bidding on your competitors' branded terms is tantamount to declaring war" - strong words indeed, and if you don't have the stomach for the battle then you shouldn't begin hostilities.

And then there's timing - if the competitor has greater band awareness, then it's worth a bid - if you make mp3 players then coming up in a search for "iPod" is obviously going to be worth it.

She sums up by saying that "marketers need to remember that it is a business decision based on value, risk and timing, and not a moral judgement".

But is she right, or should the law stop Google et al from making this form of search engine marketing possible?

Business Feet deliver targeted results through internet marketing and SEO web design