In what Steve Rubel correctly calls “one of the worst PR moves in history,” Google has apparently sent letters to certain media asking them not to use the word google as a verb.
This is another example of the troublesome crossroads between marketing and intellectual property law. I’m sure these letters are Google’s reaction to the recent inclusion of the word google as a verb in recently released dictionary editions. It’s all about protecting the trademark. Whether or not Google cares about the use of google as a verb, if it wants to maintain control of the trademark, someone is advising Google that it needs to write these letters as a token of diligence.
Coca-cola has undoubtedly faced this problem in the past, as to many people coke is a synonym for a carbonated beverage.
From a marketing perspective, however, it’s hard to understand why Google would be anything less than giddy to hear someone say “I googled it on Yahoo and here’s what I found out?” I expect Yahoo would gladly consent to the substitution of yahoo as the new search verb- but only because yahoo isn’t that verb. If it were, Yahoo would probably feel compelled to toss out a similar letter in the name of trademark protection.
I don’t know beans about intellectual property law, but speaking here as a layperson, if I were Google I’d try to craft some sort of a public license for the use of google as a verb. Being the verb for the space you’re in is a mightly powerful thing.
In other words, I’d try very hard to have my cake and eat it too.
Technorati Tags: google
Newsome.Org 