Google Sends Legal Threats to Media Organizations 449
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.""
This coming from a company (Score:1, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Dictionary definition appears to be wrong (Score:5, Interesting)
Would it not be more correct to make the exact definition of the verb "google" to be "to use the Google.com search engine to search for information on the internet"? I mean, with the current definition, a person could say, "Yeah, I just googled it on MSN." I'm surprised Google hasn't gone after the dictionary to get the definition changed.
Japanese (Score:5, Interesting)
Aww, the Japanese verb 'guguru', to search on the internet, is almost the only import from English that I don't hate. It's cool the way it becomes a proper verb with a full set of conjugations:
guguru -- google it
guguritakunakunaru -- to no longer want to google it
guguriyagaru -- f@@king google it
gugureba -- archaic pluperfect tense, now used as a subjunctive
gugurikarikeri -- poetic form: 'to have once been googled... and perhaps to be googled again'
Possibly from proto-Japonic '*gugumi', c.f. Goryeo '*g-g-o'.
Mind, I suppose it would depend on whether Google trademarked 'google' spelt in katakana.
Google = hypocrites (Score:3, Interesting)
They also stole "Googolplex" [wikipedia.org] to name their corporate offices.
Google is as bad as Micromart, Wal-soft, and LOL. Part of their success is making you think otherwise.
Re:Dictionary definition appears to be wrong (Score:5, Interesting)
There is merit in defending the word "Google." After all, how many people (Simpsons fans excluded) associate the Dumpster brand with excellent trash bins? Similar to Google, the Xerox company has attempted to reclaim its name [theinquirer.net] from generic use as a verb. After all, a TrashCo bin is not a dumpster. A store brand tissue is not a Kleenex. A bandage made by anyone other than J&J is not a BandAid. A Ricoh copier is not a Xerox machine. Yahoo! Search and Windows Live Search are not Google.
You Google. I Google. We all Google. (Score:2, Interesting)
So, suck it up, Google. This means you've won!
They want to avoid the Sony fate (Score:4, Interesting)
I can understand the move. They sure as hell don't need more "market presence", they already have it. But isn't it interesting how things change? During my marketing courses, our teacher was running up and down with the primary goal to make your product name the "generic" name for the product group, so your brand is on everyone's mind when they think about the product group. Today, it's the worst thing that could happen to you, you may well lose your brand that way.
Did I already say today that brand/patent/copyright laws are sometime a little off the path of common sense?
Re:Evil (Score:2, Interesting)
Google is a business. If they don't [DO X], they're committing suicide. If the management doesn't, they're going to be sued into oblivion by their shareholders.
Pointing out that a corporation needs to do something to protect it's business is no defense against the claim that the action in question is evil.
Re:I can't find my copy of the memo from Google, (Score:2, Interesting)
Coke should threaten too (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Dictionary definition appears to be wrong (Score:1, Interesting)
Jim
Aspirin trademark -- not in the US since (Score:5, Interesting)
Heroin was also a Bayer trademark until the end of WW1. Bayer AG was merged into IG Farben sometime after WW1. After WW2, IG Farben directors were convicted of massive war crimes, as a result, IG Farben was broken up in 1951 -- Bayer AG was again a separate company.
Adobe is a bit uptight too (Score:3, Interesting)
Although in some ways the pervasion of Google as a verb might possibly be a Bad Thing (TM) for them (as reflected in earlier comments), they just appear petty to people by doing this. I would have thought such widespread use just reflects the strength of their brand.
Adobe also gets their knickers in a twist about the use of 'Photoshop' as a verb. Though I'm not totally sure it's not meant in a 'It's funny. Laugh' [adobe.com] sense...
Re:Dictionary definition appears to be wrong (Score:2, Interesting)
From a Coke drinkers aspect... (Score:1, Interesting)
Me: "No I want a Pepsi"
Waiter: "Well, I could say 'ok' and bring you a Coke and not tell you about it"
From the Coke drinkers aspect it's even worse when you associate "Coke" with cola. You ask for a Coke and instead of telling you that they don't have Coke but some other form of cola they just assume any cola will do.
I'm sorry but I simply do not like most other colas, at all. When I ask for Coke it means Coca Cola, not Uncle Joe's Cola.
The battle is over... (Score:2, Interesting)
They can join the ranks of xerox, jello and kleenex. Their trademark is so successful, that it's become a generic term.
LK
I googled (Score:2, Interesting)