
Supreme Court asked to nullify the Google trademark - SwellJoe
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/08/supreme-court-asked-to-nullify-the-google-trademark/
======
seandougall
I don't really see the parallel to the other generics listed.

Sure, talking to somebody about how you "googled" a search term is analogous
to asking someone to "pass me a kleenex". Pedantic people will feign
confusion, but otherwise it's totally legit.

Registering a domain name that uses the word "google", which is what happened
here, is more like trying to sell "Puffs brand kleenex". Pretty clearly not
legit, at least here in the US.

~~~
throwaway76543
If the term is generic then Alphabet loses a right to prevent others from
using it in the marketplace. "Kleenex" is not a legally genericized trademark
in the US -- though it certainly has potential to become one.

Actual genericized trademarks in the US include: Aspirin, Dry Ice, Flip Phone,
Kerosene, Thermos, Trampoline, Videotape. You absolutely can sell your own
off-brand of the above product using these terms in the US. Entirely legit.

More here:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericize...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericized_trademarks)

~~~
seandougall
It all depends on what the company that owns the trademark does to try to
prevent erosion and maintain a strong tie between the word and the brand
itself. A related Wikipedia article [1] specifically mentions the lengths
Google has gone to in this respect.

All that said, there may be an issue of prior art, from The Hitchhiker's Guide
to the Galaxy:

> "And are you not," said Fook leaning anxiously forward, "a greater analyst
> than the Googleplex Star Thinker in the Seventh Galaxy of Light and
> Ingenuity which can calculate the trajectory of every single dust particle
> throughout a five-week Dangrabad Beta sand blizzard?"

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_trademark](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_trademark)

~~~
bonesss
Prior art applies to patents, not trademarks. Trademark rights arise from use
in commerce.

Trademarks generally go to the first user within a given market. In this case,
had the Googleplex delivered online search services and were in business
before Google they would be able to stop Google from being "Google" if that it
would dilute the value of their trademark or, more likely, cause customer
confusion.

Ideally they would have federally registered the trademark and also protected
it in the market in a timely fashion. If not they would lose their protection,
which is why trademarks are vigorously protected.

------
lettergram
Highly doubt that'll happen, otherwise that probably would have happened to
the word(s) kleenex, Jacuzzi, crock-pot, etc. They are all synonymous for the
items discussed, and in fact shorter to say than the generic term for the
products: "tissue paper, "hot tub", "slow cooker".

It's just called brand strength...

~~~
mc32
Xerox also nearly became generic. Coke for cola or even any fizzy drink in
some places.

I don't think Google is going to become generic.

~~~
reaperducer
That's what Bayer thought about Aspirin.

But I still agree with you.

~~~
MBCook
I thought they lost that trademark because of their involvement with the Nazis
during World War II?

Am I thinking of some other drug?

~~~
dragonwriter
It (and other of their property, intellectual and otherwise) was seized by
some allied governments during WWI (not WWII), but in the US that just got it
sold to a domestic company. Who then lost the aspirin trademark to
genericization.

~~~
MBCook
WWI. Right. I knew it was seized by the government but I didn't realize it was
given to someone else.

Interesting.

------
Animats
Could happen. Wikipedia has a list of trademarks formally lost for becoming
generic: Aspirin, Catseye, Cellophane, Dry ice, Escalator, Flip phone, Flit
gun, Heroin, Kerosene, Lanolin, Laundromat, Linoleum, Mimeograph, Sellotape,
Spidola, Teleprompter, Thermos, Trampoline, Videotape.

Xerox is still fighting becoming generic. 3M continues to fight on for "Scotch
tape".

~~~
blahedo
I double-take every time I see some fiction where some supposedly real person
uses a capital letter for "dumpster", because seriously nobody does that, but
apparently there is actually a Dumpster brand and the company that owns it is
notoriously litigious.

~~~
faboo
What in the world is the non-"Dumpster" word for a dumpster?

~~~
Animats
The Dempster Dumpster had a standard form factor, so that the forks of a
Dempster Dumpmaster truck could pick it up and dump it into the back.[1] The
patents have expired, so now anyone can make compatible rubbish bins and
trucks. The standard form factor lives on for compatibility with the installed
base. Properly, the term "Dumpster" refers only to containers compatible with
that system.

There's also the Dempster Dinosaur, for when a Dumpster just isn't big
enough.[2] That form factor is called a "roll off".

The Dempster brothers solved the problem of collecting, lifting, packing, and
moving a lot of trash without hand labor, and dominated the industry for
decades. Dempster, the company, seems not to have survived. The "Dumpster"
trademark was allowed to lapse. From the USPTO:

    
    
        DUMPSTER (EXPIRED) 
        CONTAINERS FOR RECEIVING, TRANSPORTING, AND DUMPING MATERIALS OF VARIOUS
        KINDS-NAMELY, REFUSE, TRASH, GARBAGE, SCRAP, DIRT, AND ROCKS.
        FIRST USE: 1936-09-01. 
    

The generic term is "rubbish bin".

[1]
[http://www.classicrefusetrucks.com/albums/DE/DE07.html](http://www.classicrefusetrucks.com/albums/DE/DE07.html)
[2]
[http://www.classicrefusetrucks.com/albums/DE/DE05.html](http://www.classicrefusetrucks.com/albums/DE/DE05.html)

~~~
voidz
In Dutch, we call it a container. Yes, the English word is used by the Dutch
to refer to the rubbish bin we all have outside of our houses. They're all the
same style too pretty much: hard plastic (not sure which type) and all pick-
uppable by the garbage collectors. Though they do come in different volume
sizes.

[https://autoline.nl/img/s/gemeentelijke-machines-
vuilniscont...](https://autoline.nl/img/s/gemeentelijke-machines-
vuilniscontainerImpex-240L---1_common--15112011195853415200.jpg)

------
slg
What is the motivation here for the plaintiff? Isn't it rather expensive to
appeal a case all the way up to the Supreme court? Is there really that much
money in owning sites like GoogleDonaldTrump.com? I can't imagine it draws
that many visitors. I would also think the only serious buyer would be Google
and I doubt they would be open to a settlement that might damage the strength
of their trademark in the future.

~~~
riku_iki
Some Google competitor can sponsor this. If TM will be nullified, there will
be tons of low quality products with Google word in the name, it will damage
brand significantly, and create a lot of customers confusions..

------
adwf
Doubt it will succeed. I use "hoover" when I'm actually using a Dyson. I'd
never say I'm googling something when I'm actually using Bing.

~~~
jstanley
As a counter-anecdote, I often say I'm googling something when I'm actually
using duckduckgo.

~~~
veneratio
I also do this, but that's because I work at Google and got tired of
explaining to coworkers why I don't usually like the results from our search
engine! Also, "I duckduckgoed that" doesn't roll off of the tongue very well.

~~~
spraak
I'm surprised you'd not get culturally ousted for that? I know nothing about
Google's internal culture, but I'd assume everyone would be against using
someone else's product.

~~~
wutbrodo
> I know nothing about Google's internal culture, but I'd assume everyone
> would be against using someone else's product.

Your expectations make it sound like you've only worked at companies with
terribly unhealthy workplace cultures. When I joined Google, I remember
noticing that probably 50%+ of my coworkers used iPhones. That changed with
all the free phones they gave out, but any place that would "culturally oust"
you for not drinking the Kool-Aid sounds like a nightmare to work at.

------
carapace
One day after switching to DuckDuckGo I found myself explaining to a friend
that, "I no longer use Google to google things." It gave me pause.

------
peteyPete
So you better control how successful you get or you may have your name made
meaningless. This is ridiculous.

When I say I googled it, I looked it up on google. If I looked it up
elsewhere, I'll I looked it up on X or X or just looked it up online. Don't
penalize the company because people misuse the name.

When I say I tweeted it, I don't mean snapped it, or vice versa. Just because
the name gets misused, doesn't mean the service providers should get
penalized.

------
davis_m
"There is no single word other than google that conveys the action of
searching the Internet using any search engine,"

How does "search" not convey searching the internet using any search engine?

~~~
glitcher
Exactly.

> The appeals panel said trademark loss to genericide occurs when the name has
> become an "exclusive descriptor" that makes it difficult for competitors to
> compete unless they use that name.

Nobody can convince me that Bing will improve it's marketing by suggesting
that people should "use Bing to google anything on the Internet"!

Interesting off-topic thought - I still catch myself saying "I'm going to uber
there" when I'm actually using Lyft.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
I still instinctively tell people to "google it" even though I exclusively use
Bing or DuckDuckGo. I usually catch myself after.

~~~
RJIb8RBYxzAMX9u
And in an alternate universe:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfHuZ5qrYX4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfHuZ5qrYX4)

~~~
chops
Holy moly!

So cringeworthy!

------
raquo
So, were the trademark nullified, could Microsoft come up with a google of
their own, perhaps on google.bing.com? I mean, they probably wouldn't, but
could they?

~~~
jlgaddis
I suppose they could register the bing.google domain and point their search
engine users to [https://bing.google/](https://bing.google/)

~~~
vitus
That sounds rather difficult, given that Google manages that TLD. It's no more
plausible than Google registering [http://google.bing](http://google.bing).

And no, they are not alone as far as brand-based TLDs go:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_top-
level_dom...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_top-
level_domains#Brand_top-level_domains)

------
rhcom2
I see this happening but not for another few decades.

