Comments on: Google calls in the 'language police'

Google calls in the 'language police'

eclectica — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 12:14:06 -0800

Google calls in the 'language police': "Google is now a verb, meaning to search. It sounds like the ultimate compliment to the company, so why do its lawyers want to keep the word out of our dictionaries?"

By: the fire you left me

the fire you left me — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 12:21:04 -0800

Like Xerox, once in the public lexicon, a company loses control over the name.

By: cachilders

cachilders — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 12:22:15 -0800

Dilution of trademark. Bad news for a company like Google.

By: dgaicun

dgaicun — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 12:26:24 -0800

All I have to say to Google and its lawyers is 'Good luck!'

By: Nauip

Nauip — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 12:46:31 -0800

I've been using it as a verb for a while. Someone asks me something and I would say 'I dunno. Google it.'

By: Tubes

Tubes — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 12:53:53 -0800

When was the last time you blew your nose in a "Puffs tissue?" Everyone calls it "kleenex" regardless of brand. I grew up with that one, so I'm used to it, but an example that really grates on me is the current hip-hop weenie tendency to refer to "Lexus jeeps" and "Lincoln jeeps." I'm sure Chrysler, owner of the Jeep brand, wishes there was something they could do about that. I also use "Google" as a verb, meaning only to search on Google. I think that's natural. I don't know if preventing inclusion in the dictionary will reallly help prevent what they hope to avoid: talk of "googling Yahoo" and "googling Teoma."

By: delmoi

delmoi — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 12:55:41 -0800

honestly, I really hate the use of the term 'google' as a verb. For one thing, I don't really like the word in general. Google is a cool site and all, but they picked a lame name. Secondly, Google is a nice company and all, but I'd still rather not corpritize more of our language.

By: xmutex

xmutex — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 13:16:10 -0800

We're not corporatizing our language, we're languagizing our corporations. Duh.

By: junkbox

junkbox — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 13:16:17 -0800

I don't know what you guys are talking about. Whenever I googol something I just add 100 zeros to the end of it...

By: wendell

wendell — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 13:20:09 -0800

Whenever I Google something, I send it to Barney.

By: Dark Messiah

Dark Messiah — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 13:32:18 -0800

What a load of shit-eating, queercore cockmanship!

By: grimmelm

grimmelm — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 15:54:42 -0800

The story is unfortunately short on details. In point of fact, Google has been contacting people who define "Google" as "search for" and asking that they change the definition to "search for using Google." Not a large deal -- and Google's suggested change comports with how most people use "Google" when they use it as a verb.

By: SpecialK

SpecialK — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 17:18:01 -0800

William Gibson used Google as a verb in his most recent book, Pattern Recognition. I'm afraid that Google is too late.

By: simonk

simonk — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 17:24:43 -0800

Companies have to fight to make their brand recognized, but keep it from becoming generic at the same time. Once the term doesn't refer specifically to their product, it's worthless. McDonald's fights very hard to make sure that the prefix of "Mc" is only applied to their food for the same reason Google doesn't want to be in the dictionary.

By: Orb

Orb — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 17:31:52 -0800

When I tell someone to "Google it", I hardly mean for them to go do a search on Yahoo (or wherever). I mean that they should go to Google and look for it. Is it really being used so generically as to mean "search on an search engine"?

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 19:10:23 -0800

Proof that even the smartest companies eventually turn dirty stick stone stupid. Fuck 'em.

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 19:25:21 -0800

I can understand why Google wants to protect the term, but in truth, nothing lasts forever. It was going to happen eventually, the same as Kleenex and Jeep and Hoover and Xerox, and even Coke. I never ask for a "Pepsi", no matter what brand of cola they serve. I ask for Coke and get a cola. I think Google's had a good go. They're still the leader of their market. 99% of the uses of "google" as a verb probably do refer to their specific search engine. What's the deal?

By: dhartung

dhartung — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:34:53 -0800

There are two issues here, the practical and the legal. As a practical matter, Google cannot win: just as Xerox and Kleenex (noted above), the names have become widely used as synonyms for photocopy and facial tissue (though not universal: I became confused at a house when I was asked to "bring the Scotties", and wondered where the dogs were). But. Xerox has successfully defended its legal trademark rights, and Google is setting out to do the same. By diligently following up whenever major publications or websites "mis-use" their trademark, they will be able to protect their rights and prevent the word from legally passing into the generic realm, joining aspirin, escalator, and others. This is going to entail a steady stream of "lawyer letters", otherwise known as the cease and desist order. Note that success is not required, only diligent action. As long as Google can show that they have followed up on mis-use of the mark, they will be able to forestall any third party challenging the trademark in court. People tend to think that corporations are getting, well, all corporate when they do this, but unfortunately that's the way the laws are written at this date. Copyrights are for set terms, but trademarks are valid while in use and must be defended.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 22:04:23 -0800

Good point, dhartung, although I'd suggest the lengthy chain of reasoning that leads to the conclusion that trademarks 'must be defended' contains a few weak links.

By: UrbanFigaro

UrbanFigaro — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 22:43:58 -0800

Here is the actual ~~cease and desist~~ "delete or revise" letter, and this is the revised WordSpy definition. Seems pretty reasonable to me.