Slashdot Mirror
Google Loses Gmail Trademark Case
amigoro writes "A court in Germany today banned Google from using the name 'Gmail' for its popular webmail service following a trademark suit filed by the founder of G-Mail. Daniel Giersch, started using the name G-Mail in 2000, four years before Google released 'Gmail'. "Google infringed the young businessman's trademark that had been previously been registered," said the Hanseatic Higher Regional Court in its judgement."
Sounds like the guy had a legitimate case. I'm sure that it cost him a fortune to defend a suit against Google. I'm surprised Google thought they could win this one. Isn't case law in this area pretty strong? Nissan.com I think is the traditional example.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
I may be wrong but didn't 'froogle' (now product search) die for the same reason?
This looks like a smart young businessman. Fighting Google instead of selling a name means he gets publicity, and it looks like he is sure that he can turn this publicity into profit for his company and himself. Bad to hear Google preferred to fight him in courts instead of trying to find a way to get him on board. This is the way of big bureaucratic corporations that lack innovation, and I would expect smarter choices from a company that seeks to employ the brightest engineers. I guess such a smart (and resourceful, for being able to withstand so long against a giant) businessman would be an asset if Google could persuade him to join them. Now thanks to this legal battle, more people than previously know about his business, and this is only good for him and I am sure he knows it. I wonder what he is going to release in, say, 5 or 10 years.
I sure hope google doesn`t change the name of gmail globally.
I personally use my gmail address for just about everything. It scares me to think about how long it would actually take to go around and change my email address on all the various services I use.
I was waiting for some to suggest gnaaMail
I'm not sure if I'm being taken for a troll-ride here, but I'll bite...
From The Fine Article, and indeed The Fine Summary, it is pretty obvious the guy wasn't just trolling for copyrightable names, and hoping that one day, four years into the future, a large corporation would adopt one of his brands as a name for a flagship product. Not to mention that the "G" probably refers to his name (Girsch-Mail any less catchy?), but also Google clearly thought it was a unique enough name that they would be able to successfully use and legally defend it when they were picking a name for their new email service.
What makes your Gmail account auctionable?
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
Bill.Gates@gmail.com
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
They call it Googlemail in Germany, and the UK, where the name Gmail was owned by another company. Pre-existing @gmail.com addresses registered by UK users were left as they were, while new signups changed to @googlemail.com.
...in Germany.
Americans, happy birthday!
Did they try to offer him a big wad of money, say US$50M bucks?
That'd certainly be a lot better way to do it than ruin some poor guy's life with worry over court cases - which incidentally does Google's image no good.
ISO certified == THX certified
I'm sure laws like this will change over time. After all in an increasingly global market, you can't afford for your trademark to be diluted by having a different name in each of six different geographical regions. I'm sure that someday the WTO will have something arranged so that the guy producing the most benefit from the trademark will win. If you came up with the trademark (or a copyrighted idea) twenty years ago and are using it to generate a million dollars in business per year, you have to surrender it to the bigger company who comes along and is making a billion dollars per year off of it.
I would think that would fall into the whole imminent domain concept that they use to justify taking part of your property to build a strip mall or expand a road. Likewise, a billion dollars of business in your economy is more important to society than some piddly million dollar business using the same concept or trademark.
Sad, but . . . I think that might be in our future.
Well, I don't know that it is necessarily very auctionable, but I was one of the people to get an early invite. I got to pick a name when a bunch were still available. I picked techgeek <@> gmailNOSPAM.com. It's not as cool as some of the emails that went on ebay in the beginning before google put a stop to auctioning the accounts, but I figured it was a good one.
While we are talking about it, I would like for everyone that is reading this to quite using my account to sign up for services. This account is getting a few hundred spam messages per day. I thought it would be a good idea to get a cool name on a service that I knew would become popular, but it seems like it is now on every single spam list in the world!
I think this guy is full of it when he says it's not for sale. What he's really saying is "I'm going to drag this on as long as I need to until you pay me enough." Certainly there will come a point when the guy will realize he'd have to be stupid to pass up so much money that could benefit his company far more than the name Gmail ever could.
TWD - TheWhiteDragon
Visit my weblog
I think I'm going to register iMail as a trademark,. . . and then sue Apple when they launch their new iPhone/iMac/iBook/iPod/iNausea email service! ;-)
So, does this only happen in Germany, or is Google banned from using Gmail internationally?
It is also true that Apple owns Apple. I find it pretty ridiculous that the world has lost a fruit to the corporate world, and that a place that sells apples, could find themselves sued if they have this fact in their business name.
If the pattern goes 9am, 10am, 11am, why isn't noon 12am?
Does anyone else find it ridiculous that a company, whether it be Google or someone else, thinks they can basically own the rights to a letter in the alphabet.
In trademarks, they are never trademarking only parts of the name, but the full name. Google is not trademarking "G", but "Gmail". They can't trademark "mail", but again, it's the full sequence of letters that is.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
I thought that Apple had trademarked the small letter "i" in front of product names... I thought for sure there would be some sort of battle over "iGoogle."
Only if the apple store would compete in something like the IT or multimedia business.
A windows cleaner service won't be put in a legal minefield with Microsoft, for example.
Sometimes these lines are blurred, and sometimes companies intentionally try to cross these lines, but I doubt Apple would be able to get a lawsuit of an apple store through.
One example that became a real case in court was the Apple Corps vs Apple one, but in that case it was because both shared a field of business (music entertainment).
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Yeah, it is totally ridiculous. In fact IBM is using THREE letters so they are triply as bad!
It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
It is also true that Apple owns Apple. I find it pretty ridiculous that the world has lost a fruit to the corporate world, and that a place that sells apples, could find themselves sued if they have this fact in their business name.
Remember that trademarks are restricted to a line of business. Apple can be used to sell computers, vacations, and music without any problem (at least until the first Apple started selling music!). I doubt any of those companies would be successful in shutting down a grocery seller using the name apple (barring other factors that might confuse consumers).
Trademarks can coexist in separate areas of business.
I don't care, but don't let that stop you from trying to tell me anyway.
I get the point of, say, not letting someone use the name GMail or Google to setup their own email or search service because they'd be unfairly profiting from Google's name. What's the point in not letting Google take a service that was launched out of the U.S. and extend it to Germany? Granted, it's bad for this guy's business, but it's not like Google is unfairly profiting from his trademark.
Also, what affect does this have for Google in the U.S.? I mean, it's theirs in the U.S., right?
Finally, I presume this is the guy's site: http://www.gmail.de/
Not really. If you sell apples, you're not even remotely in the same business and don't have anything to worry about from Apple Computers or from Apple Records.
Actually, if you had spamMePlease@gmail.com, the automated email scrapers that people use to assemble these lists would probably assume the 'spam' had been added in as an anti-spam mechanism, and MePlease@gmail.com would end up getting all your spam...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Let me help you with that typo: techgeek@gmail.com. A very nice address it is, and I'd be happy to bid $0.75 if it is spam free.
I think you will find that McDonalds has pursued several high-profile lawsuits against companies who dare to put the prefix "Mc" on their name.
If the pattern goes 9am, 10am, 11am, why isn't noon 12am?
eskwayrd = m^2c^4
Not anymore, apparently
If I were Google I would simply shut down Google.de and the German GMail and give the whole country the big old middle finger. I bet it would only take months for local public pressure to force g-mail to get out of the way of the real Google GMail.
That is not how it works. The guy owns the trademark and Google is infringing. There is also no appeal, because the case is obvious. The only way for Google to get this resolved is to convince the trademark-owner. Public opinion and/or pressure does not play any role here.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Actually G-mail/Gmail is 5 letters, not one. Thats what was trademarked, not the letter it began with.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
It's the exact same argument that is brought up regularly regarding Microsoft in the EU. "Microsoft should just pull out of the EU instead of paying all the fines. That'll show 'em!!!11"
"A Lisp programmer knows the value of everything, but the cost of nothing." - Alan Perlis
It's good I never tried PleaseSpamMe@gmail.com
Actually, they don't. In fact, they weren't even the first company to trademark the word, Apple Corps began in 1968 and the two have been going at it in lawsuits ever since then whenever Apple Inc (the computer company) starts selling something related to music.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
gmail.com and googlemail.com are the same place. If you get an address on either, you can receive mail on both and check your mail on both. All that happens is that based on which country you're in, you'll get redirected around and wind up with a slightly different logo in the top left. That's it.
And if I were the entire automotive industry, I'd refuse to do business in California!
--Jim (me)
Yeah goes to show how much you can trust any large corporation to stick to their corporate slogan.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
It is the wrong spelling, but since I have been using it since 1984 I think it will pass newbie. L8r.
Does yours get spammed a lot?
I keep getting spam for new furniture and chair repair...
--
Steve.Ballmer@gmail.com
I get spammed a lot on mine from shampoo and soap sales.
richard.stallman@gmail.com
Don't mod me, bro'!!!!
Mine will sell faster, since its the new trend!
Carlos.Slim@gmail.com
They may be applying for a trademark for Gmail now, but don't be the person who trademarks the gPhone or gCar or gSearch. They may decide to go into that market and then sue you on the basis that it MIGHT confuse the customer and the courts take it away.
It is just too easy to abuse the courts and the laws. I don't if Google has to pay millions of dollars to buy the trademark in every country in the world. If it were that obvious then maybe they should try a little harder to find an actual unique trademark instead of expecting the courts to say "Your a big company so we will give it too you."
Imminent most commonly means,
"Threatening to occur immediately; near at hand; impending;
-- said especially of misfortune or peril."
Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.
Nice, i think that way too. hug, Fausto http://www.toloicouto.adv.br/
I think you will find that McDonalds has pursued several high-profile lawsuits against companies who dare to put the prefix "Mc" on their name.
Yes, but they don't always win.
See: http://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/articles/26/0C043
Basically, a guy named McBratney sponsored a rugby team, and put his nickname 'McBrat' on the team shorts. McDonalds took offense at that, but unfortunately for them, McBratney is an IP lawyer who had a good case.
Ever stop to think
Anybody know who is the paying the legal costs?
Although Google is using some strong tactics to try to preserve its ability to use the Gmail name, it makes sense to try to hang on by any means possible.
Many people use Gmail as their primary email address; a large portion of these people may be using Gmail as their only email address. If Google were to lose the rights to using the Gmail name, it would make very little sense for email to still go to a gmail.com. A large number of people would be put through considerable difficulty to tell their contacts to send their email to a new address. Hey, with all that difficulty, why not switch to Yahoo! Mail? Pretty AJAX interface with integration with that new fancy iPhone.
This is also not a new story. Check where that thing --> leads. There was a Slashdot article about this a long time ago too.
I don't know about Germany and IANAL, but many countries of the ability to take a person's property (e.g. compulsory acquisition in Australia, eminent domain in the US). Usually they compensate you at the market rate to do so. If they really wanted to, the German government could probably compulsorily acquire the trademark. In this case, public opinion would definitely have an influence.
Look out!
And this is why I have my email hosted (along with web hosting) on my own domain name. First of all, it establishes a "non-generic" email address that's easy to remember (myname@lastname.com anyone?), instead of some weird randomuser127@hotmail or some other nonsense. Personally I recommend to everyone who is serious, especially contracting professionals, to get their own domain (or a family domain, or whatever) for email purposes. You never know if your current free email provider will one day start charging, or change their privacy policy, or in this case, be in danger of losing their domain name. For someone who is professionally connected, changing your email is an incredibly difficult task, and you stand to lose a lot of extremely valuable communication. I've been using my email address for years now, and I couldn't be happier. Since I host it, I get to connect to it however I damn well please. I can run the best webmail client on the server that I like, I can get at it with IMAP, POP, or any other method I see fit, and customize my spam blockers the way I like. It's truly miles above any of the free services out there, though Gmail probably has the best web client.
I saw a guy a short while ago whose actual email included "NOSPAM", as in "joeblowNOSPAM@example.com". You have to include the NOSPAM in his address because that's really part of it. I thought it was a very clever idea; he told me that he gets very little spam.
If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
Google can use your account (and other similar accounts) to figure out what is spam, they just have to do a bit of whitelisting.
And yes, Google is completely wrong -- and evil -- here!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
For starters, Germany is the export world record holder. Its 80 million people are one of the most important markets on this planet. It is also one of the leading countries of the European Union, the largest and most profitable economy around.
You don't walk away from that market, unless you have an (economic) suicide wish and want to be fired by your shareholders.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
That's what they said about the immigration bill in the United States Senate too.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
If anyone has tried searching for g-mail or for that matter, g-mail.de (i'm sure millions have), all you get is different flavors of gmail links for the former while tons of blog/journal entries on this case for the latter. BUT NO GMAIL.DE !!! On the other hand, both Yahoo! and MSN search show up the site in top 5 search results, understandably enough. Google and Transparency... Anyone??
You fail at humor.
Yay, I have a sig.
If I were Google I would simply shut down Google.de and the German GMail and give the whole country the big old middle finger. I bet it would only take months for local public pressure to force g-mail to get out of the way of the real Google GMail.
Why would anybody want to get back to provider that screwed them earlier. If my search and mail provider would cut me out of my services, I would need to build a new one, mayby from their competition. Same with their marketing, how could I rely on such provider with my ads that have caps on their service.
You don't stop offering your services to customers over some little things.
GMail has been around for several years.. yet no objections were raised by him when it opened (google.com has been talking it up since it's inception as a beta service). Go ahead and think "well, it wasn't in germany then..". Bullocks. It's a Google tool. If you've a local google.xyz domain to connect to, chances are it will be in your back yard soon. It just sounds like this GMail company in Germany got lucky with their name, and rode the wave of Google's Marketing department all the way until he got his chance to open suit against them (because if you don't defend it, you lose it). It's a more subtle squatter movement than registering "microsoft.com", knowing microsoft will eventually pay you off - but imho, sitting on it while Google spent the marketing dosh makes this very similar.
When we start seeing governments step in to force small businesses to change their names and give up domain names that they legitimately acquired and use, because a larger company feels it would be better if they could use the name and domain, then we will have a problem.
:) )
There are enough abuses already in the patent and trademark areas without adding a rule that states simply that the bigger your company the more rights you have.
There was recently a case in the UK where The Tan Hill Inn, which is apparently the "highest pub in England", was told by KFC to remove references to "family feast" from its Christmas menu. I mean, apart from the fact that it is ludicrous that anyone could claim ownership of the term "family feast", it is unlikely that you are going to confuse a meal that apparently includes Guinness and stilton pate, roast turkey and Christmas pudding with a cardboard box of fried chicken, chips, coleslaw, potatoes, gravy and a 1.25-litre bottle of some soft drink. I would also assume that if you are sat in a (probably) few century old building, with a Bar and a sign saying "Tan Hill In" over the door, it is unlikely that the moment you open the menu and see family feast you are going to think that you are in a KFC and get all confused.
However by your reckoning I assume KFC should be permitted to force this pub not to use this generic term, after all KFC is an international brand, it benefits far more people to have KFC use the term rather than some pub in the UK, not to mention the fact that clearly no one else will have used the term "family feast" before KFC started using it...
The system for trademarks is (if not abused) fairly sound in most places; If you use it first its yours, if someone else uses a term you have trademarked but are in a different business areas (and there us unlikely to be confusion) then that's OK and you cant trademark something too generic. If that is all enforced properly then problems should not occur. In this case Gmail was being used by a German fellow before Google got into the game, he is using it legitimately, the two services are similar enough that there could be confusion and Google clearly didn't check to see if the trademark was in use before it started using it or was aware that it was in use and didn't care, either way that's Google's problem.
Lastly the people in this thread saying that Google are being evil by pursuing this case are wrong, and they are wrong for the reason that you already mentioned, Google are trying to be consistent internationally, that is good for their users, they offered to buy the domain and were denied. It made good business sense for them to attempt to acquire the domain through legal means and if they had it would have been beneficial to people in Germany who want to use their services (whether it is more or less beneficial than the other is obviously debatable). They haven't left this individual out of pocket (and if they had then the law would have had to say he was in the wrong - so fair enough.)
(Sorry for the ramble, I think it makes sense...
Google must really like the name "G-Mail". But is "Google" a good name in the first place anyway?
I use spam@mydomainnamebutimnottellingyouwhatitis.com as a spam harvester - I registered it on several mailing lists and forums and then plugged it directly into my spam assassin learning filters since everything to that address is guaranteed to be spam - since I did that the accuracy of spam assassin has certainly increased.
I suspect I could do a little more with auto blacklisting of mail servers and such things but haven't got around to it yet
I also find it rather amusing to give that address to companies over the phone when they can't give me a sensible reason for wanting my email address (ie its purely for "marketing purposes")
$_="Slashdotter";$syn="OTT";s;..;;;sub _{print shift||$_};s!ash!Perl !;s=$syn=ack=i;tr+LLEd+BLAH+;_"Just Another ";_
Goomail, Moogle, Screwyouihavelotsofmoneymail....
Would you like a slice of toast?
Probably gets very little email from humans too :-)
I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
In the UK you are told to use @googlemail.com, however you can use @gmail.com if you want. Mail to both addresses ends up in the same mailbox I guess its the same for Germany
That's actually not a bad idea. I have a fairly robust anti-spam setup wit filters, spamd, and a one time challenge response system for email that hasn't been whitelisted and can't be validated as spam. Using said system, I could possibly do away with the challenge response portion of my system. Thanks for the idea. Also, I have user@domain.com to give away to those I fear will spam me or sell my info.
Now that's not very nice of you, mentioning techgeek@gmail.com 's email address. Why, if i was techgeek@gmail.com i would be very upset now. Imagine all the email harvesting bots that'll pick up techgeek@gmail.com as a valid email address? Poor techgeek@gmail.com and his inbox. Well, i won't participate in that, techgeek@gmail.com !! Rest assured that i will never give away techgeek@gmail.com on any website and i will say to anyone using or posting techgeek@gmail.com that they should stop it, because techgeek@gmail.com is getting enough spam as it is!
There. You're welcome.
Oooh, the Germans are mad at me. I'm so scared! Oooh, the Germans! Uh oh, the Germans are going to get me!
link
Pretty ironic for a search engine company.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Actually, Google already lost this case in April 2006, but they appealed. Now, they lost the appeal also at the Hanseatic Upper Court. Google cannot appeal at the German Supreme Court but could try to file for non-admission of the ruling. Here is an article that gets the details right.
Interestingly, Google already rebranded GMail in Germany as Googlemail, so it's really not that clear why they think that they have a case and why it is important to them.
I'm sure they're not getting any responses, though!
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
or regular mail, for that matter ...
There is an easier way to fix it; they pay this guy $500M dollars - or twice whatever his total net assets are. Google is in a position to fight him over the name, but they are also in a position to bring him into the fold. Why spend money on court fees if you can just buy him out?
Actually, the reason for that is probably precedence. They want wins against their trademark to discourage future such challenges.
[Ego]out
Works, although technically competent folks keep getting it wrong... spamme@ spamtrap@ and just plain ol' spam@ are all valid addys I use for various things on a few domains I own...
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
So the big guy should always have it.
Whay should I bother thinking about a good trade mark if the big guy will come and steal it from me.
Do you have any other good ideas or are you in a slow day today?
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
And we are all thankful for that.
Aufwiedersehen.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I think that's probably a waste of effort.
Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
Many websites use email addresses as user login names.
If you provide me@gmail.com and you try to use that to confirm login registrations you may have problems because you will be seen as me@googlemail.com
It is a minor annoyance to be fair, but it is there.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Those leeches take a life of its own in big corps....
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Funny, yes, but one could really attempt to quantify this. Since there are 26 letters and 17,576 three-letter combinations, IBM could eb said to be only 26/17,576 = 1/26^2 as bad.
Why is the plaintiff's age important enough to be mentioned in the judgment? How old one has to be to not be "young" in the eyes of the German legal system (apparently more than 33)? Is this special treatment of adult "young" people peculiar to Germany or happens in other European countries? If I am annoyed by this, does that mean I am old?
If they really wanted to, the German government could probably compulsorily acquire the trademark. In this case, public opinion would definitely have an influence.
AFAIK they cannot, unless it is something they have a right to. They can certainly not take from somebody to give to a company. That would be unconstitutional.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
That's what they said about the immigration bill in the United States Senate too.
That is something entirely different, as schoulb be obvious to any educated person....
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
1. Search for "do no evil" (with quotes) in google
2. Click on the first link in the results.
3. Search for the phrase "do no evil" in that page
Yeah, that's right.
Moral of the story, though contradicting: 1. Google sell the results (in this case, to themselves)
2. They no longer believe in "do no evil" and hence no such motto on their philosophy page
I get spammed a lot on mine from manufacturers of ass width reduction cream.
goatse@gmail.com
You seem to be equating the terms innovation and invention. Your list of things Google did not invent does not preclude innovation in those areas.
"Syndicated advertisements existed long before Google" but highly focused, non-intrusive, online advertising is Google's innovation on top of syndicated advertisements.
"Syndicated news existed long before Google" but tailored aggregation of news and specific news searches is Google's innovation.
"Search engines existed before Google" but the ranking and crawling or other ways Google implemented search innovated search engines to give better results.
"Web mail of various kinds existed long before Google" but Google innovated by making drastically improving the UI and increasing storage space.
etc...
The tech community in general tends to define "innovation" as "invention" which is not necessarily true. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation)
Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
However he may be able to force google to hand over the gmail.com domain. Then everyone who has your email address will have to update it to 'googlemail.com'.
Domain Name: GMAIL.COM
Registrar: MARKMONITOR INC.
Whois Server: whois.markmonitor.com
Referral URL: http://www.markmonitor.com/
Name Server: NS1.GOOGLE.COM
Name Server: NS2.GOOGLE.COM
Name Server: NS3.GOOGLE.COM
Name Server: NS4.GOOGLE.COM
Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Updated Date: 10-apr-2006
Creation Date: 13-aug-1995
Expiration Date: 12-aug-2014
Not sure how valid that is but to me it looks like it was taken in 1995 or at least first registered then..
The websites I administer at work all have plain email links in them and have been active since about 1996, so naturally they're constantly being scraped, not to mention being hammered by everybody who is using old mailing lists.
To stop all the scrapers, the first 10 email addresses on the page go directly to my Spam Assassin training addresses, all of which are stuck in a single div whose CSS style is "visibility: hidden; display: none".
Nobody accidentally clicks the links, and Spam Assassin is given adequate reading material.
The land shall stone them with the bread of his son.
with a RFC 2606-compliant sample address
Isn't "example.com" the generally accepted and valid sample domain name that one is supposed to use for purposes like this?
If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
What if Apple starts selling apples?
"Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
Your premise is incorrect, so everything that follows is unsupported. It isn't the duty of police to "represent" the law -- it is their duty to enforce the law.
In a meta sense, as many cop cars have written on them, their duty is To protect and serve. . Despite this, many cops are under the delusion that their duty is To Dominate and Enslave. Unfortunately since they have the guns, the populace is dominated and, at least partially (Tax Freedom Day was April 30 this year), enslaved . With a ruler like Lord Bush in power, the domination and loss of freedom is more apparent. Hey, maybe someone will invade us and rescue us from our corrupt government and leaders (hopefully they'll do a much better job than Lord Bush did in Iraq).
"Have a nice day"
That's because, as was pointed out very early on in these comments, Google, Inc.'s motto is "Don't do evil."
Unfortunately, most trolls can't read, and those who can, lack comprehension.