Posted on 08/16/2006 3:11:01 PM PDT by holymoly
Google has said it intends to crack down on the use of its name as a generic verb, in phrases such as "to google someone."
The Internet search giant said such phrases were potentially damaging to its brand.
"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 generally describe searching the Internet. It has some serious trademark issues," a representative for the search company said.
Julie Coleman, an authority on linguistics from the University of Leicester, said she could understand Google's concerns.
"The prestige associated with a trademark is lost if people use it generically, so I do see Google's point. They also do lots more than just search, so maybe they're reluctant for their brand name to be restricted in this way," Coleman said.
But Coleman added that once new words enter into common usage, it is impossible to stop their use.
"Google can't possibly stop the spread of the verb," Coleman said. "Normal people are using it in normal conversation and in writing, and they aren't likely to face legal proceedings."
What Google could do, said Coleman, is "force dictionaries to mention its origin in a trademarked brand name, which is what the Oxford English Dictionary already does."
Even if Google's attempts to stop this misuse of its trademark turn out to be in vain, many argue it shouldn't even be trying.
Members of the blogging community have suggested it is a sign that Google is losing its once-cool facade and that the search giant is taking itself too seriously.
One blogger also suggested Google has missed the obvious compliment in all this, which is that the use is evidence the company now owns the search industry.
"This should be the ultimate compliment, and I cannot believe Google sees it differently," blogger and computing graduate Frank Gruber wrote.
Steve Rubel, another blogger, branded it "one of the worst PR moves in history".
Morgan McLintic, a PR executive based in the heart of Silicon Valley, said Google should certainly learn when to love its addition to the English language.
"'Googling' is already common parlance for searching on the Internet," McLintic wrote. "And there is only one place you go to 'google,' so this is a good thing for Google with a capital 'G'. The media's use of the verb is simply a reflection of everyday use."
Google's move reflects the concerns of other businesses, such as Xerox, which has complained that its brand has become a generic term for photocopying respectively. Apple Computer is also taking action to defend "iPod."
AOL is another technology company that has fought the tendency of brands to become generic. It has contacting media outlets in the past over the use of "instant messenger" to describe any IM application, claiming that to be its brand.
We had a Kelvinator refrigerator, a Tappan range, a Westinghouse radio phonograph, and a GE television.
And a Kenmore window fan. Sears-Kenmore could have supplied all of the above, as well. Simpler times.
Anyway, when I wish to know, I consult _Mister_ Google.
So if I tell someone, "I think I'll go grab a Coke," and I end up buying a Mountain Dew, will Coca-Cola sue me for infringement?
Ha - beat me to it. Exactly what I was thinking.
People HAVE to complain about Trademark Dilution.
A Trademark is intellectual property and a business asset.
When Google™ totally sells out to Soros, they will get more if they try to defend their brand.
They do, and they have. If you go to a restaurant that serves Pepsi products and order a "Coke," the server has to ask if Pepsi is an acceptable substitute. That wasn't the case years ago. Coca-Cola went to court and won.
We are still xeroxing and asking for a kleenex. Good luck with that I'll google later to see how the campaign is going.
Xerox screwed up by defending their name. People no longer say Xerox and say photocopy or just copy. What did that gain them? Less market share and less name recognition.
Oh well as small companies grow into large one they all screw up at sometime. Looks like Google is on the downward slide.
I think you should offer hime a Coke instead.
You will receive a bill in the mail for using their trademark.
Think about what Hormel thinks about the name SPAM!!!
maybe Google should ask the Chinese govt. to ban the term in parlance and then enact the ban worldwide in obedience to their commie leaders.
Don't be evil, Google.
maybe they should put a band-aid on it :)
Or Xeroxing. Same deal. Was it P.T. Barnum who said, "There is no such thing as bad publicity"? Google ought to just shut up.
Can we get a Xeorox copy of this made.
I'm still waiting for the RIAA to start threatening to sue people for singing copyrighted songs in the shower. Should be good for $20 a pop.
I guess I will xerox this story and ask them to google the trade mark issues...
Dogpile
How about a nice bowl of Jello.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.