Slashdot Mirror


Google Abandons the Gmail Name In Germany

praps writes "A three-year trademark conflict has ended with Google withdrawing its use of the Gmail brand in Germany. On Friday, a plain-text message appeared, beginning 'We can't provide service under the Gmail name in Germany ... Bummer.' Despite the climbdown, Google Germany's spokesman said on Monday that the action was being taken 'even though we believe we're not legally obliged to do so.'" We discussed the tussle in Germany when Google first lost in court a year ago.

46 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. Surprising? by Mensa+Babe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, it's hardly surprising. According to government records, the only names not yet trademarked are "Popplers" and "Zittzers". I remember the internal confusion at Google back in the day when there were plans to set up a worldwide network of Google hot spots, or Gspots, only to find out that it is nearly impossible to find a name that is both pleasant to the ear, even remotely meaningful and not already taken. Enyone remembers the scandal three years ago? This is another example. And what about our beloved Firefox browser? It had to change its name not once, not twice, but trice to finally get rid of the trademark problems and still any literate person will point out to the Craig Thomas' novel, not to mention the Firefox bicycle company, or the Malaguti Firefox scooter, all of which being much older than any web browser on Earth. But does it mean that people can't use Google to check for any prior art of the name they have chosen for their projects? No. It just means that all of that trademark hysteria of the last one and a half decades, this "get outta my intellectual property!" attitude, it all hurts progress. Because, at the end of the day, isn't progress what it is all about? Shouldn't we just shut up, roll up our sleeves and start making our global village a better place instead of worrying about not hurting someones feelings or not breaking some law? I am really sick of every good initiative being sabotaged by someone who "owns" some "intellectual property". Google is probably one of ten, maybe twenty companies that are more concerned about morals and ethics than profits, yet some Germans have a problem with one of its most popular names and when do they sue? When the name is already known worldwide! This is just too much. Please let me quote a great thinker, George Bernard Shaw: "If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange these apples then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas."

    --
    Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
    1. Re:Surprising? by jez9999 · · Score: 4, Funny

      But if you have an idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas.

      So, you have an idea that I thought up... for FREE!!! Evil commie. </Reagan>

    2. Re:Surprising? by MisterBlueSky · · Score: 5, Informative

      yet some Germans have a problem with one of its most popular names and when do they sue? When the name is already known worldwide!
      They sued in 2005. GMail was launched in 2004. When should they have sued? In 1999?
    3. Re:Surprising? by exley · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The name "gmail" was already taken for an e-mail provider. Except for hard-core Google fanboys (and girls), this really seems like a pretty open-and-shut case.

      For a case like Firefox, where there are other companies using "Firefox" in their name... I don't think there's any chance of bicycles and scooters being confused with a web browser. But an e-mail service and... An e-mail service, well, there might be room for some confusion there.

      Google has a shitload of money. Does anyone really think they'd back down on this if they didn't have to?

      Big gigantic company doesn't get its way every single time. Boo hoo. I think Google will survive.

    4. Re:Surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      "But if you have an idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas."

      The same could be said of STDs.
    5. Re:Surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You totally miss the point.

      - Google is known worldwide, not "gmail"
      not using your Googol-$ brand is a bummer

      - they sued right away when gmail started

      - every major multinational company knows how to
      research international brand names, but Google can't? Google is not mozilla.org
      At least they should learn how to find and use a good search engine in the internets.

      - Google is not the savior of this planet, but another BIG company in the hands of greedy shareholders, like any other.
      If you don't believe that. let's wait what will remain of Yahoo once Carl Icahn is done with it.

    6. Re:Surprising? by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You had me up until this bit:

      Google is probably one of ten, maybe twenty companies that are more concerned about morals and ethics than profits

      Google is interested in profits, period. That doesn't make them bad. It just makes them like any other publically held company. The 'Don't be Evil' motto went out the window when they went public, for better or for worse.

    7. Re:Surprising? by photomonkey · · Score: 5, Informative

      Moderation. As in, 'In moderation.'

      In moderation, most things are good. If I make a really good car, and I call it a Sephir, I don't want another company to be able to call their car (or car-related service) a Sephir.

      However, do I care if there's a Sephir cola? Probably not.

      Do I care if someone makes an email service @sephir.com? Probably not.

      Frankly, I probably wouldn't care if 'Sephir' became synonymic with 'car.'

      But the problem, at least in the US, is that firstly, to hold a trademark, I must actively defend it. Meaning that to demonstrate that defense, I have to C&D or sue every ISP and cola manufacturer that uses it, so that when some slimy car company opens up and tries to usurp it from me, I have a legal leg to stand on.

      The other problem is a sense of entitlement. Two search engines called Google? Award it to the original Google. A non-information technology product called Google using dissimilar trade dress (meaning the word, but not the logo as it sits today)? Let them run with it. It shouldn't hurt anything.

      It's not IP that hurts progress. It is the overreaching of IP theories and laws that hurt progress. If a person invents or makes something really good, why not allow him/her to enjoy some real 'bonuses' for having done so?

      --
      Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
    8. Re:Surprising? by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hey! You're infringing on the trademark of the Film Actor's Guild!

      --
      You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
    9. Re:Surprising? by mqduck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Google has a shitload of money. Does anyone really think they'd back down on this if they didn't have to? Google does indeed have a shitload of money. I'm somewhat surprised they haven't bought the rights to the name/the company. Were they asking for "too much" money? For that matter, how big are the g-mail people?
      --
      Property is theft.
    10. Re:Surprising? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2, Interesting

      When Mozilla renamed Phoenix to Firebird, I started having serious trouble googling for information on Firebird The Database Server - almost any usable information at all. You see, things like news, web pages of its users and so on. (At that time, I was learning Firebird in order to write a school project on top of it, and as a newbie, I simply used Google first to get some pointers.) Most of the things I was able to google were "OMFG the new super cute Firebird browser!". Oh, this, and the flamewsrs between Mozilla fanbois ("The branding of Mozilla Firebird won't hurt you at all, as we are no RDBMS!") and the Firebird community.

      But truly relevant search results? Googling for "firebird server" did not help at all for obvious reasons and "firebird database server" helped just a little (the interesting pages that the search found were the ones I already had bookmarked). And the ratio of user communities of the respective products (somewhere between 10:1 and 100:1? I dont know...) worsened things even further. Only after the the browser's rebranding to Firefox did the search results become usable again.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    11. Re:Surprising? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 3, Funny

      Maybe g-mail was bought by Microsoft and they asked for $171 Billion dollars to license the trademark to Google. Muhahaha.

      --
      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;
    12. Re:Surprising? by POTSandPANS · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Yes, Google does have a lot of money, probably enough to win. Google is not microsoft, they walked away instead of killing another company over a name. If you remember, there was a program called windows defender, but microsoft wanted to call their anti-spyware program windows defender. Microsoft threatened to sue, the guy gave up the name just because he couldn't afford to fight microsoft for it.

      Before you say Google lost, maybe you should consider that they decided to walk away..

    13. Re:Surprising? by jesterzog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It just means that all of that trademark hysteria of the last one and a half decades, this "get outta my intellectual property!" attitude, it all hurts progress. Because, at the end of the day, isn't progress what it is all about? Shouldn't we just shut up, roll up our sleeves and start making our global village a better place instead of worrying about not hurting someones feelings or not breaking some law? I am really sick of every good initiative being sabotaged by someone who "owns" some "intellectual property".

      I can't comment on this particular case with much knowledge, but if I spent a lot of time, money and effort to build up a local product around a particular name, I'd be really annoyed if someone else came in from overseas and usurped all that effort making it worthless. This is particularly the case if their only claim to having the name was that they happened to be a company 1000+ times larger than my own (eg. Google, Microsoft) with expensive lawyers, and they thought it'd be a nice name for their own service. Businesses and organisations shouldn't get special treatment over others just because they happen to be well known and (in some cases) liked by a lot of people.

      Clearly there should be some kind of common sense approach to trademarks, without clearly defining what that actually means, but I don't think that simply stomping on anyone who happens to already be using a name that a corporation like Google might want is the way to go. If these guys were using 'gmail' in Germany before Google created its own service, and if they were using it for something that might be confused with Google's service (which they clearly were), and if they notified Google within a reasonable amount of time, then I think they're completely within their rights to take this action. Good for them.

      It's part of doing global business that some names might already be being used in some countries. The people at Google should know this as much as every other corporation and plan for it accordingly. If Google picked a global name that might eventually send more business to a possible competitor, then it's Google's own fault.

    14. Re:Surprising? by moronoxyd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Du you pronounce "gmail" and "g-mail" differently?
      I don't.

    15. Re:Surprising? by damista · · Score: 4, Funny

      Dunno about you but I pronounce "gmail" and "G-Mail...und die Post geht richtig ab" VERY differently.

    16. Re:Surprising? by lobStar · · Score: 2, Informative

      Except if you run a service called Gmail yourself, that is.

    17. Re:Surprising? by jorghis · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Um, no, they tried to fight the little guy who held the rights to it for years and eventually the court ended up ruling against them. "Not being evil" would have been if they had walked away as soon as they realized that another guy legitimately owned the name gmail. Google's failure to crush the little guy in this instance was not for lack of trying.

      In the case of windows defender at least MS had an argument that the third party had no right to use the name "windows" as part of their trademark. Google didnt even have that.

      Basically the MS case in this instance is less evil than the Google case. It is amusing to see all the fanboys try to find some reason why google was being morally superior in this instance though.

    18. Re:Surprising? by Saint+Fnordius · · Score: 3, Informative

      As the two anonymous cowards pointed out, trademarks are not global. When applying for a trademark, the business in which the trademark will be used must be listed. So when applying for a trademark for Sephir, your original trademark only covers transportation. A Sephir ISP or cola could co-exist as long as neither brand makes an attempt to suggest that a relation exists. Doing something like "Sephir Cola, the perfect drink when driving your Fnord Sephir" would be a no-no. The same goes for "official" licensing: since Sephir Cola exists, Gurps Beverages can't offer "Gurps Cola Sephir Collector's Edition".

      So since successful trademarks can expand into licensed merchandise, it is prudent to meet those with similar names, and define beforehand who gets what sector. Of course, this won't prevent legal battles down the road (see Apple Records versus Apple Computer)...

    19. Re:Surprising? by david.gilbert · · Score: 5, Funny

      yup. Frankly, if someone had mentioned 'gmail' to me with no explanation back in 2003, I'd have assumed that it was a google product. But then I don't live in Germany.

      Yup. Frankly, if someone had mentioned 'Germany' to me with no explanation back in 2003, I'd have assumed that it was a Google product. But then I don't live in reality.
    20. Re:Surprising? by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh if only, I've been wanting Google to make an Ermany application for ages.

    21. Re:Surprising? by bytesex · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is the problem with people running international companies that rely on a single letter to brand all their products - you can only have 26 of them. Let's see where we are with that; 'g' is for Google, 'j' is for Sun, 'i' is for Steve.. Hey ! We can make a nursery rhyme out of this !

      --
      Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
  2. Re:"Bummer" by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Oh, look at poor Google. It's like a wayward schoolchild who lost his iPod."

    "Poor Google's users" is what you'd be thinking if you had actually put some thought into it.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  3. FFS by zoomshorts · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Call it GoogleMail , not rocket science.

    1. Re:FFS by xaxa · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They call it GoogleMail in the UK too, and have done for some time, because they lost a more-or-less identical trademark case here too. If I go to gmail.com I'm redirected to a site where all the branding reads 'Google Mail'.

  4. Dasterdly Deutchmen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    A look at gmail.de nets some strange foreign ramblings. The first bit which says

    'G-mailer versenden und empfangen ihre elektronischen Nachrichten und echten Briefe über www.gmail.de und sparen so Zeit und Geld (Briefporto ab 2 Cent!) und entlasten unsere Umwelt.'

    Now, it's been awhile since I was in high school, but that roughly translates to:

    'G-mailer verily and emphatically this here electronic new right and etches uber briefs www.gmail.de and spares so this and gold (portable briefs at 2 cents) and enlisted users underwhelmed'

    Clearly, they want to use gmail.de to sell personalized underpants at 2 cents per unit, despite the fact that wearers are not too impressed.

    These krauts get to use gmail.de to sell their kinky feitsh-wear while the smart folks at Google get nothing? Remind me again who won the war!

    1. Re:Dasterdly Deutchmen by itsme1234 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Why would Google want to put their services on each top-level domain? Just detect the web browser's language settings and present the German content.

      THAT is the whole point: google never tried to take over gmail.de or g-mail.de or however is called. The "german" gmail claimed in court that somehow gmail.com used in Germany is affecting their trademark. The immediate effect (that was going on for years) was that you couldn't get a gmail.com (notice .com not DE) email if you come with a German IP - you would get a googlemail.com account instead and everything will be mostly transparent (gmail.com will go to googlemail.com, emails will reach you even if sent to name@gmail.com instead of name@googlemail.com and so on). Now it is even worse: gmail.com goes to this text page that says something like "you should go to mail.google.com but we are not allowed to give you a link here" (and presumably they can't redirect you automatically as before). YES, google is scared/forced not to to put a link to mail.google.com on gmail.com (of course they own both domains). Is this messed up or what?

  5. Silly Krauts by RipTatermen · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm sure Googlegemeinschaftelektronischepostsystem will be just as catchy.

    1. Re:Silly Krauts by GeneralEmergency · · Score: 3, Funny

      You win.

      Yours was longer.

      --
      "A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
      GeneralEmergency
    2. Re:Silly Krauts by Red+Flayer · · Score: 4, Funny

      That should be Göglegemeinschaftelektronischepostsytemische.

      Won't someone think of the umlaut?

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    3. Re:Silly Krauts by RipTatermen · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, I'm fairly sure that -s System is a noun, meaning 'system', and systemisch is an adjective, meaning 'systemic', but I was mostly into German for the Kindereggs, so maybe you're right.

    4. Re:Silly Krauts by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Funny

      Can I just remember the IP address? It's easier to memorize.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Silly Krauts by BluBrick · · Score: 2, Funny

      Google mail user1: "What does that URL mean?"

      Google mail user2: "I don't know - he hasn't got to the verb yet!"

      --
      Ahh - My eye!
      The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
    6. Re:Silly Krauts by n3tcat · · Score: 2, Informative

      ö is expanded to "oe" not "oo"

      What you wrote sounds closer to "gurgle" than Google.

    7. Re:Silly Krauts by xaxa · · Score: 2, Funny

      Gòøglègêmêínschàftélèktrõnïschèpõstsytëmïsch

  6. Buy the company takeover the trademark by W00dyW00d · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They should of just bought the company and took the trademark. They might have some cash to spare?

    1. Re:Buy the company takeover the trademark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      They tried and Daniel Giersch denied them.

      Guess what, if they offer you a ton of money for something, you DON'T have to take it!

  7. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  8. Re:'Gmail' brand sucks everywhere guys by W00dyW00d · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can give people that email too. So if you have Slashdot@gmail.com then Slashdot@googlemail.com works too.

  9. Hardly the end of the world by exley · · Score: 2, Informative

    FTFA, this is the message GMail/Google Mail users are now getting in Germany:

    "We can't provide service under the Gmail name in Germany; we're called Google Mail here instead. If you're traveling in Germany, you can access your mail at http://mail.google.com./ Oh, and we'd like to link the URL above, but we're not allowed to do that either. Bummer."

    Users are then forced to copy and paste the URL into their browsers to access their Gmail account.

    People will have to copy and paste... Oh no, those poor users!

  10. Gmail can be confusing in German... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    G pronounced in German sounds like "gay". A few years ago when I told friends that I got a G-Mail beta account, they made fun of me and asked what my girlfriends thinks about that...

    1. Re:Gmail can be confusing in German... by thedarkone64 · · Score: 5, Funny

      what my girlfriends thinks about that.

      You see, that's how we know you're lying.

    2. Re:Gmail can be confusing in German... by RealGrouchy · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's why I never venture onto .de sites without first turning on my G-dar.

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    3. Re:Gmail can be confusing in German... by aCC · · Score: 4, Informative

      G pronounced in German sounds like "gay". A few years ago when I told friends that I got a G-Mail beta account, they made fun of me and asked what my girlfriends thinks about that...

      What? That must have been a situation of an English speaker pronouncing the letter wrongly; probably just having read somewhere that it's close to the pronunciation of "gay". If you hear a German pronounce the letter, you will hear that it's nowhere near "gay".

      You can compare this to people saying that the English "th" sounds like "s".

  11. Google is Gigantic by MushMouth · · Score: 4, Informative

    first of all it is 20K not 5K,
    secondly their market cap at $171B is one of the largest in the world,
    so yes they are Gigantic!

  12. Re:Hmph by Kalriath · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Except that he had a service called "Gmail" before Google had a service called "Gmail".

    As such, your entire post is completely irrelevant.

    --
    For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".