Can one law firm prevent a rival law firm from purchasing its name as an internet search term?

Cannon & Dunphy paid for "Habush" and "Rottier" so that its ad would appear above Habush Habush & Rottier when people go looking for the well-known and widely advertised Wisconsin personal injury firm. Claiming a violation of Wisconsin privacy law, Habush sued and — we learn today — lost.

The court rejected Cannon's argument that it had a First Amendment right to use the other firm's names like this, on the ground that the process of using the name in the computer searching process isn't speech. Habush lost, however, because the use of its name was not unreasonable.

[Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Charles F. Kahn Jr.] characterized internet key word search terms as the modern equivalent of proximity advertising that business competitors have done for years:
"In ancient times, people used paper telephone directories. A user could find a particular attorney by viewing the alphabetical listings while carefully avoiding the block ads preceding and to either side of the name being searched. The plaintiffs themselves sought the attention of everyone seeking anything in the directory by placing a full page ad on the back cover of the telephone book."

The comments at the link are mainly people saying: Who cares who wins this lawsuit? They're all lawyers!