The Genericization of Google: Positive or Negative? What’s in a name? Certainly, it can be tied to product identification, brand loyalty and a tremendous amount of revenue. Companies protect their trademarks knowing that public perception must be positive, controlled and maintained. Without control over your name, it seems self-evident that doom awaits. According to Jamie Lundi, “copyright genericide can occur when the benefits to society of copyright protection (i.e. the incentive to create) cease to outweigh the costs” (131). Truly, copyright protections won’t apply if the material becomes so used as to become commonplace. In his article, Pike comments upon rules and regulations that protect a company from losing creative control over …show more content…
Trademarks are "signs", according to Alan Davidson, which distinguish particular goods and services (268). Davidson's position is that a trademark means a representation of a company’s logo which “is protected under common law and the Trade Marks Act 1995” (268). Lundi suggests this protection is not absolute, and that if trademarks are commonly used, they lose legal protections by becoming "too valuable" (18). In essence, they become public property. There are many such product examples including the use of the word Kleenex for a tissue and Skidoo for a snow-mobile. In the case of Aladdin Industries Inc. v. Canadian Thermos Products Limited. In this case, the court held that the primary issue was distinctiveness. The position of the court was that the word “thermos” was properly registered in 1907. But, as the first action claiming copyright infringement was not heard until 1964, too long a period had passed. The word “thermos” in the last 57 years has passed into common parlance and thus genericized. This early case set the standard and created the assumption that genericization must always be negative. However, once a product or service becomes synonymous with the company itself, it can accrue a significant competitive advantage to the originator. Bernard Gova presents compelling evidence regarding how popular Google has become. In 1998, "about 85% of all searches (in Europe) were performed" using Google (364). Thus, Google may be genericized, but most internet searches are conducted using the Google search engine. This means that Google holds a monopoly on the market and being genericized has, if anything, aided in the popularity of their
v. VIP Prods., LLC 666 F. Supp. 2d 974 (Mo., 2008) Anheuser-Busch makes a distinction between confusing and non-confusing parodies, the latter being protected as a parody. The important factors in the case were that the price point of the products was the same, they were directly competing goods and the survey showed that there was a level of confusion (30.3% were confused), in addition, consideration was placed on irreparable harm caused by the defendants use of the mark, the priority lay with the first to register the trademark, lastly the District Court considered public interest, i.e. whether the public was deceived. Similarly in Starbucks Corp v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee Inc., 588 F3d 97 (2d Cir. 2007) the court distinguished Louis Vuitton S.A. v Haute Diggty Dog, LLC, 507 F.3d 252 (4th Cir. 2007) by holding that if (as in the Louis Vuitton case), the mark is used in non-competing goods, the defendant conveyed that it was not the source of the plaintiffs product and if the actual use of the mark does not impair the distinctiveness of the plaintiff’s mark there may be an argument in favor of the defendant, however, if the defendant’s humor is not conveyed to the public, and does not increase the public identification of the plaintiff’s mark with its mark it will fail to establish
“Can you imagine what a mess a world would be without names? (website)Names are very important to a person and their individuality. Ayn Rand’s novel “Anthem” is a book in which the people written about do not have names. The importance of having your own individual names is huge. A name can have meaning given to it, like how the name Sue means lily. Most parents when giving you your name have a meaning behind it and put much thought into what their future child should be named. Names can give you a part of your identity.
Companies realize what people need and they take it as sources to produce commodities. However, companies which have famous brands try to get people’s attention by developing their products. Because there are several options available of commodities, people might be in a dilemma to choose what product they looking for. In fact, that dilemma is not real, it is just what people want. That is what Steve McKevitt claims in his article “Everything Now”. When people go shopping there are limitless choices of one product made by different companies, all choices of this product basically do the same thing, but what makes them different is the brand’s name. Companies with brands are trying to get their consumers by presenting their commodities in ways which let people feel impressed, and that are some things they need to buy. This is what Anne Norton discussed in her article “The Signs of Shopping”. People are often deceived by some famous brands, which they will buy as useless commodities to feel they are distinctive.
A business name is an important part of marketing effort. It shows how customers perceive the business and the image of the business is based on this perception (Fox, 2012). It is
According to www.telegraph.co.uk, “[y]oung people aged between 16 and 24 spend more than 27 hours a week on the internet.” Certainly this much internet usage would have an effect on someone. What exactly is the effect of using the internet too much? Nicholas Carr’s article “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” argues that we are too reliant on the internet and it is making the us dim-witted and shortens our attention span. While Clive Thompson’s article “Smarter than You Think: How Technology Is Changing Our Minds for the Better” states that technology is not only a collection of knowledge, it also a method of sharing and recording our own knowledge. I fall between both Carr and Thompson. I agree with car on his points of us being too reliant on the internet but disagree when he states that it is making us less intelligent. Meanwhile, I also support Thompson’s statement that the internet allows us to assimilate vast amounts of knowledge but disagree with his opinion on how we should be reliant on
In every given business, the name itself portrays different meanings. This serves as the reference point and sometimes the basis of customers on what to expect within the company. Since personality affects product image (Langmeyer & Shank, 1994), the presence of brand helps in the realization of this concept. Traditionally, brand is a symbolic manifestation of all the information connected with a company, product, or service (Nilson, 2003; Olin, 2003). A brand is typically composed of a name, logo, and other visual elements such as images, colors, and icons (Gillooley & Varley, 2001; Laforet & Saunders, 1994)). It is believed that a brand puts an impression to the consumer on what to expect to the product or service being offered (Mere, 1995). In other application, brand may be referred as trademark, which is legally appropriate term. The brand is the most powerful weapon in the market (LePla & Parker, 1999). Brands possess personality in which people associate their experience. Oftentimes, they are related to the core values the company executes.
The article talks about how valuable a name can be. Whether it is the name of a person or a company, a name can bring about monetary value to someone. “Like any asset, a good name can be bought or sold.” (Clarion-Ledger) The article uses examples such as the names of companies and goods, and relates them to a value that society has placed on them. “If you have a good thing, it will draw a crowd.” (Clarion-Ledger) It is the crowd that will respond to the name and spend money in that direction due to name familiarity.
...e graph to contrast Gmail and Yahoo!’s email user was found to be surprisingly difficult and provided unrelated results: a link to “A List of Mergers and Acquisitions” on Wikipedia popped up as the second choice when typing in the key words “google vs yahoo email graph” into the search bar. When one searches for maps, Google presents Google Maps in 1 in 13 search results, while MapQuest and Yahoo! Maps seem nonexistent. Additionally, Youtube (which was acquired by Google in 2006) and Google Video enjoy higher ranks while Bing Video is 6th in line. Google’s market share over the search industry has increased rapidly over the last decade, but that doesn’t mean the results it provides are reliable. Google therefore is characterized by monopolistic traits because its increasing influence and control allows it to manipulate markets to further promote company popularity.
In the absence of registered trade mark rights, case law suggests as a general principle, that mere similarity of goods is not enough for an actionable wrong to occur. Passing off derives from the common law action deceit which is the civil action for fraudulent misrepresentation. Passing off is a non-statutory cause of action that has developed over the years through case law and has changed considerably overtime. Passing off came into existence long before trademarks became registerable and has always been available at common law for marks refused registration, not registered or ineligible for
Nicholas Carrs article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” makes points that I agree with, although I find his sources to be questionable. The article discusses the effects that the Internet may be having on our ability to focus, the difference in knowledge that we now have, and our reliance on the Internet. The points that are made throughout Carrs article are very thought provoking but his sources make them seem invaluable.
Intellectual Property Law used to only protect art, music, and literature, but because of technological development, Intellectual Property Law now also protects a greater variety of innovations including designs, inventions, symbols, discoveries, and words. The phrase “intellectual property” was first known to be used in the late 1700’s; however, it was not widely talked about, nor was the Intellectual Property Law in actuality commonly implemented. Intellectual Property Rights slowly gained more attention by mid-1800’s after the Industrial Revolution had taken place: more companies were created, competition between corporations became fiercer, and owning unique innovations were crucial to winning the competition. However, as Intellectual Property
People move away from their extended families, and traditions can fade, which is why it is important to have a trademark that easily identifies your ...
The public’s perception of these two products is very different. Most people see Google as ‘the’ search engine; people have grown up with it and its most people’s first stop when searching for something on the internet, in fact when people are unsure of something they’ll often use the expression “I’ll Google it”, this sums up how important Google is in everyday life. There is however a small problem that accompanies brands that get as big as Google and that is a fear of a monopoly and how much power a company has over the economy/ the entire world.
“…Those bearing a trademark that is identical to, or indistinguishable from, a trademark registered to another party and infringe the rights of the holder of the trademark.” (Bian and Moutinho, 2011).
Over the years, many companies such as scrabble, Tylenol, Channel, Louis Vuitton and even Polo Ralph Lauren (PRL) Corporation have had to fight to protect their intellectual property. By looking more specifically into Polo Ralph Lauren, a fashion company that offers a range of products from clothing to home furnishings, this paper will explore trademark laws and how these laws could be advantageous one hand and limit one group and limit business abilities on another.