≡ Menu

Google does not know why it is top dog in search

I was reading on digg today and read a post about how Google was upset about an article from the Washington Post. The Washington Post was praising Google because “google” had entered Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. Google sent them a letter saying, “This characterization of Google, the letter warned, is “genericide” and should be avoided.” Google does not want their name to be used generically.

Are they stupid? The only reason they are making money is because this has happened. The Washington Post was praising them for such an accomplishment. I have a feeling Google may fail at some point because of pure stupidity. If you don’t understand why your company is doing well you will screw it up at some point. In the letter to the Washington Post they actually said it is improper to say “I googled somebody”. That is why your company is where it is. I have said many times this is why other companies will not beat Google at the Search game. I had no idea that even Google did not know this.

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Roman August 7, 2006, 5:09 am

    I read somewhere that they must send out the warning letters whether they want it or not to protect the trade mark. Apparently the trade mark law says that you must “defend” your brand by sending out bunch of legal crap left and right.

  • Durant Imboden August 7, 2006, 6:09 pm

    Google’s lawyers are just doing what they need to do. A company can lose its trademark if it becomes widely accepted as a generic term. Wikipedia has a good explanation of this in its “Trademark” article. See the section headed “Maintaining trademark rights — abandonment and genericide,” which describes how Bayer lost U.S. trademark rights to “Aspirin.”

    The article goes on to mention companies that write letters or run ads to discourage improper use by journalists and others (I’ve seen such ads in WRITERS DIGEST and EDITOR & PUBLISHER), and it adds that “legally it is more important that the trademark holder visibly and actively seems to attempt to prevent its trademark from becoming generic, regardless of real success.”

  • ogletree August 7, 2006, 10:32 pm

    That is true but the point is Google went a step further with examples of what not to do. They did not need to do that.