Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Monday August 21 2017, @09:44PM   Printer-friendly
from the just-duck-it dept.

Is the term "google" too generic and therefore unworthy of its trademark protection? That's the question before the US Supreme Court.

Words like teleprompter, thermos, hoover, aspirin, and videotape were once trademarked. They lost the status after their names became too generic and fell victim to what is known as "genericide."

What's before the Supreme Court is a trademark lawsuit that Google already defeated in a lower court. The lawsuit claims that Google should no longer be trademarked because the word "google" is synonymous to the public with the term "search the Internet."

"There is no single word other than google that conveys the action of searching the Internet using any search engine," according to the petition to the Supreme Court.

It's perhaps one of the most consequential trademark case before the justices since they ruled in June that offensive trademarks must be allowed.

Source: Ars Technica


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Osamabobama on Monday August 21 2017, @11:27PM (6 children)

    by Osamabobama (5842) on Monday August 21 2017, @11:27PM (#557279)

    I get the impression that when people talk of googling something, they literally mean that they are going to use Google to search for it. That strikes me more as market penetration than generification. Probably the opposite of generic, in fact.

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2) by Murdoc on Monday August 21 2017, @11:43PM (1 child)

    by Murdoc (2518) on Monday August 21 2017, @11:43PM (#557286)

    I know too many people that don't know the difference between "google" and "search engine". Many don't even know it's a website, since they just type their query into the url bar. If they are not aware of their choices, they can't make informed choices.

    • (Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Tuesday August 22 2017, @04:24AM

      by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Tuesday August 22 2017, @04:24AM (#557381)

      I know too many people that don't know the difference between "google" and "search engine".

      These are the same people who thought the "Internet" was the big blue E.

  • (Score: 2) by forkazoo on Tuesday August 22 2017, @12:52AM (3 children)

    by forkazoo (2561) on Tuesday August 22 2017, @12:52AM (#557322)

    I've also never heard anybody say "Google that on Yahoo" or "I am going to Google for a place to eat on Yelp." Every time I've heard somebody use Google as a verb, they literally mean "I am going to use a service operated by Google." So it seems silly to assert it's generic. I have sometimes heard people use "To Photoshop" in a generic way to mean any kind of image editing, regardless of specific tools used. But that makes sense, since there were actual shops that sold photo related services before there was Adobe PhotoShop image editing software for Windows and Macintosh. Somebody unfamiliar with the tool would understand it has something to do with photos. "Google" wasn't a word associated with networks or searching or looking things up before the company. Maybe in another 10 years, it'll become more like Xerox where the brand name really did become generic in common parlance as a result of market dominance, but I haven't seen in happening.

    • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Tuesday August 22 2017, @04:08PM (2 children)

      by urza9814 (3954) on Tuesday August 22 2017, @04:08PM (#557548) Journal

      I know people who use "Google" as a generic -- even saying they'll "Google it" and then they go ask Siri or Alexa.

      I even fall into it myself sometimes, although I try to avoid it...I'm so anti-google I block 'em at the firewall...but "Duck-duck-go it" is rather awkward and not commonly understood, and "do an Internet search for it" is a bit lengthy..."Google it" is by far the most concise way I know of to get that point across. But I'd love some better alternatives if anyone has one...

      • (Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Tuesday August 22 2017, @07:08PM

        by Aiwendil (531) on Tuesday August 22 2017, @07:08PM (#557644) Journal

        but "Duck-duck-go it" is rather awkward and not commonly understood

        Some of us are using "duck it" (or "duck that"), if you bark it you only have to explain it once.. kinda like how "google it" got established :)

        Then again "search [for] it" works quite well for me when not caring about which engine people use.

      • (Score: 2) by forkazoo on Tuesday August 22 2017, @08:16PM

        by forkazoo (2561) on Tuesday August 22 2017, @08:16PM (#557703)

        I think "do an Internet search" is no longer necessary because if you say "search for the battle of Madagascar" nobody is going to assume that you mean to immediately drive to a physical library and start digging through paper index cards in the card catalog drawers, nor that they should start lifting up their sofa cushions to see if it's hiding with loose change. The Internet has become sufficiently ubiquitous that it's just implicit whenever you are looking for information, unless you specify a specific book or something like that.