Guy Files Lawsuit To Strip Google Of Its Trademarks

from the good-luck-with-that dept

Tue, May 29th 2012 9:40am — Mike Masnick

We all know that "Google" has become a verb (i.e., "just Google it") but has it reached the point that it refers generically to all search? One... er... enterprising guy is trying to make the legal case that this is so. David Elliott has filed a lawsuit to have Google's trademarks in its own name declared cancelled because the term has become generic. As you may or may not know, if a trademarked term is judged "generic," then trademarks on those terms can be cancelled -- which is why many trademark holders on near-generic words often fight hard against them becoming so generic. It's why terms like Xerox, Kleenex, White-Out, Band-Aid and the like -- which defined a category and often led people to assume that all such products were called that -- are often seen as dangerous failures in trademark circles, rather than massive successes for so dominating a category.

In this case, Elliott is pissed that Google won a ruling against him after he registered over 750 domain names that used Google's marks in some manner. He's got a pretty big uphill battle here. While "google" may be a verb, it seems like it's a verb in the context of using Google's search engine, not using another alternative search engine. Elliott's claims seem to focus on the fact that google is used as a verb, rather than that it's generic. For example, he quotes CEO Larry Page telling people to "have fun and keep googling!" and then seems to think this supports is case. It does not. It's not hard to see how it actually suggests the exact opposite. You would assume that someone in Larry Page's position would say something like that because he wanted people to keep using Google's products, not because he wanted them to generically search the internet with anyone's search engine.

I'd be quite surprised if this actually got anywhere.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: david elliott, generic brand, larry page
Companies: google

56 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 9:55am

Wasn't this document photoshopped?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 10:02am

I had this funny image of Mr Ballmer telling some audience "have fun and keep bingling!"

Ahem. I'd say the judge will look, laugh internally at the Guy and dismiss the case with a straight face.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 10:07am

Re:
> I had this funny image of Mr Ballmer telling
> some audience "have fun and keep bingling!"

Wouldn't Ballmer say:
have fun and keep getting binged!

Shouldn't someone in Larry Page's position have statements vetted by lawyers? Instead of saying:

Have fun and keep googling!
Shouldn't he say:
Keep consuming/purchasing and keep searching using Google(R) branded properties
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Donnicton, 29 May 2012 @ 10:10am

Re: Re:
I'm going to go bing the neighbor's dog to see if I can get it to stop barking.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ComputerAddict (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 10:13am

Google is kind of becoming generic to the less than internet savy people. I've met people that think Internet Explorer is Google and vice versa.

Me: "Open your internet browser"
Them: "You mean Google?"
Me: "Well kind of, just double click on the 'e' icon"
Them: "Yea, Google"

(Clarification, if I were offering more than quick advice, I'd Suggest getting Chrome/Firefox. In fact i'll use cmd line FTP to download firefox before opening IE on a fresh install.)

Although I don't think we should evaluate trademarks based on people that are illiterate in the subject area.. but that's never stopped the government from doing it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 10:13am

Good to see Google defending its' intellectual property. Oh, wait...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Keii, 29 May 2012 @ 10:17am

I'll just leave this here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYVCk10AzS0
[ link to this | view in thread ]
:Lobo Santo (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 10:17am

Re: Almost there
Someday, if your skill & understanding with computers increases, you'll just abandon Windows & Mac entirely.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 10:31am

Generic?
I've yet to see someone use a search engine other than Google when they some "I'll google that".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
GMacGuffin (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 10:35am

By this logic, Yoko Ono would lose the rights to her name too -- having become a verb as well; i.e., "to Yoko," e.g. "She Yoko'd the band," to describe a girl who breaks up the group via feminine wiles.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 10:37am

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/7c02f2506a/bing

"Hey Darryl, I binged your mom last night"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
GMacGuffin (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 10:37am

Re:
Crap ... these lawyers are just down the road from me! I prefer dumb lawsuits that come from elsewhere.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 10:40am

Re: Re:
You see, bing doesn't stick or rhyme. It's like Duck Duck Go. "Have fun and keep ___________!" Google did it right.

On a side note I really wanna see suggestions for the empty space above, I feel it could be an interesting collective experience.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 10:41am

Re: Re: Almost there
In his defense, he sounds like his experience is in a "tech support" role. So we can't know from this snippet if he doesn't use alternative forms of hardware/software. =]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
:Lobo Santo (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 10:44am

Re: Re: Re: Almost there
Very true, you are quite right.

I'm just planting little nudges & seeds where I can.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lowestofthekeys (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 10:46am

Re:
Damn, meant that as a reply.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Machin Shin (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 10:54am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Almost there
Now if only the stupid DRM on everything would not cripple the usefulness of other OS options. I have nice high end gaming machine I built out, then when I tossed in my bluray I find that in order to play one in Linux I would have to rip the movie to my hard drive.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 11:02am

Re:
Not, it was gimped. You can tell by the pixles.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 11:28am

Re:
Have you watched the new Hawaii Five-O? I'm going to assume Microsoft dumped a hell of a lot of cash into for product placements, since they are all using Microsoft based tablets/phones. The part that really stood out and I found extremely funny was when they were in the museum and one of the characters spouts off some trvial fact about something, when the other charcter showed surprise the guy replied, "If you don't trust me, why don't you go Bing it."

I'm sorry Microsoft, you lost, it'll be forever known as googling. Accept defeat and try to beat them at coming up with the next innovation, rather then chasing after them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MrWilson, 29 May 2012 @ 11:28am

Re: Re: Almost there
Unfortunately, every OS has it's own problems and benefits. Windows has ubiquity and familiarity, which means more compatible software and easier troubleshooting since thousands of others encounter the same issues. I won't get into the downsides which have already been well covered. Mac is nice if you happen to like getting locked into their singular user experience, but also if you're a designer. Linux is great, but only if you have the time to invest in learning how to do things for yourself. It's free as in kitten, which means it takes an investment to make it work. Some people don't want to have to put a lot of effort into getting software to work.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike, 29 May 2012 @ 11:39am

Google
My parents would be a counter-factual to the idea that "googling" is only for searching with "google.com" They have regularly said that they've googled for something whilst using Yahoo and/or Bing (which ever happened to be the default search engine).

I actually think this guy SHOULD have a good case. It's really not unlike escalator and the like and, unlike Kleenex, Google doesn't seem to have an active, regular enforcement policy regarding the using of "googling" for non-Google products.

Google itself is a counter-factual. Search for define:googling:

"googling present participle of goo�gle (Verb)
Verb:
Use an Internet search engine, particularly Google.com: "she spent the afternoon googling aimlessly".
Search for the name of (someone) on the Internet to find out information about them."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 11:46am

Re: Google
I'm with you on this Mike. I know several people who use the term "google" to mean "search with Yahoo".

I started thinking Google should probably lose it's trademark on the term when I started noticing TV shows use the term "google" even when they use a made up search engine.

However, they should keep their trademark on their colorful logo. That is distinctly Google.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JustMe (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 12:03pm

Glossed the most important part of the story
The guy is doing this because he is creating a 'Google+Noun' service using those 750 domains. Basically he is trying to say that Google shouldn't get to keep their trademark so that he can mooch off of their popularity. Lame.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sean T Henry (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 12:07pm

Re: Re: Re:
Have fun and keep Binging an idiot!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Base Testline, 29 May 2012 @ 12:07pm

sick of the shtick
This guy says that 'search' is a google,
but math says it's One with an oodle.
any Judge will see through,
how this lawyer's nose grew,
when he tries for the kit-n-kaboodle.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yoshord, 29 May 2012 @ 12:12pm

Re: Generic?
I just tend to not be too vocal about correcting people when someone tells me to Google something and I use Blekko instead.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sean T Henry (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 12:12pm

Re: Re: Re: Almost there
Linux distros are not hard to get setup and are getting easier. We set us Unbuntu on the PC of a retired poly-sci teacher who is not good with computers in general the next week when we came over he had remote printing set up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 12:35pm

Re: Re: Google
Doubt they can enforce any trademark at all other than the logo and their G-series products. A search for "Google" yields 33 million images ranging from cool to complete bizarre googles. And I think Google couldn't care less about it being common.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 12:35pm

Re: Re: Re:
Have fun and keep Ducking!

See? It can be done.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 12:45pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Almost there
Quote:
2012-02-17, Friday :: Playing back BluRay discs
posted by Compn

Correction

MPlayer does support encrypted BluRay playback, though not all steps are handled by MPlayer itself. The two alternative methods use the URL schemes bd:// (always supports decryption, but you need the key for each and every disk in ~/.dvdcss/KEYDB.cfg and only works well with very simple BluRays, similar to dvd:// vs. dvdnav://) and br:// (uses libbluray and should support the same as VideoLAN in the link below but that is untested).

End correction

MPlayer needs some documentation on how to play encrypted discs. Patches are welcome. VideoLAN users can follow the instructions here | Mirror

I have not tested, but it looks like it works on Mac OS X, Linux and Windows. Thanks to whoever created this and hopefully no one will have to rip the discs to a hard drive before playing now.

http://www.mplayerhq.hu/design7/news.html

Have you tried that?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 12:48pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Almost there
http://sourceforge.net/projects/lxbdplayer/

There is also this player there, maybe it works who knows.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Colin, 29 May 2012 @ 12:53pm

Re:
Simply awesome.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MrWilson, 29 May 2012 @ 12:58pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Almost there
I agree that Linux is not that difficult to get setup. Ubuntu is a cinch to setup. It's getting things to work after the OS is installed that becomes a problem. You want to run Windows-based software? WINE can be a pain. Also, there isn't a perfect or perfectly compatible alternative for everything that you can do on a Mac or a Windows machine. GIMP is decent, but Photoshop is more fully featured. Try finding an interoperable analogue to every program in Adobe's Creative Suite for Linux. OpenOffice and LibreOffice are great for their compatibility, but students will find them difficult when they first start because there aren't classes on how to use Linux office software being taught in college all that often. What college is going to teach OpenOffice in addition or as an alternative to Microsoft Office? Most software is released for Windows and knowledge of Windows is necessary if you have to interact with other people who aren't tech-savvy. So working an office job or working tech support may necessitate maintaining a working knowledge of a Windows OS.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 1:01pm

Re:
William Shatner would lose his name too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 1:07pm

Re: Re: Re:
I did that with a bottle of roundup this weekend. The weeds are dead and the dog hasn't made a noise in two days.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Machin Shin (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 1:13pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Almost there
Yeah, thing is no matter how you do it in Linux you have to have software that cracks the encryption. This should not be the case. I should not have to pick the lock on something I bought.

I can make them play. I am just disgusted that I have to do all this to make them play when it should be simple matter of clicking play. I still find it ironic though that their copy protection does nothing but annoy people who actually bought the disk.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Simple Mind (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 2:04pm

Re: Glossed the most important part of the story
Clearly he is trying to scam, but I don't see how? How does having domain names that start with "google" help him to scam?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TDR, 29 May 2012 @ 2:10pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Almost there
Not to mention Ubuntu's craptastical Ubuntu One interface which basically rips away most of the extensive customizability (is that a word, lol?) that is part of the draw for Linux. I realize you can log in using Ubuntu classic, but even in there you still can't seem to customize the top and bottom taskbars like you could in the older versions of Ubuntu. At least they never responded for me, I'd right-click on them and nothing would happen.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 2:14pm

He has a premature point
I use "Google" as a verb, but I don't mean to use Google's service specifically. I mean to to a web search generally. So he has a point, "google" is in danger of going the way of "zipper", but it's not there yet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 2:33pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Almost there
I find Windows in the den and Linux in the basement works pretty well. The Linux makes Windows tolerable.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Forest_GS (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 3:05pm

Re: Re: Almost there
I would if there was an open source OS that ran every Windows game without any hiccups. Until then, I shall multi-boot.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 3:24pm

"Elliott is pissed that Google won a ruling against him after he registered over 750 domain names"

Wow!! This guy has a LEGITIMATE USE for 750 domain names!! He must have had some astoundingly good idea of how to make use of them. If that's the case, I wish himn all the success in the world.

Either that, or he's an asshole squatting on 750 domain names for the sole purpose of preventing anyone else with a legitimate use for them from using them unless they pay him ransom for the names. If that's the case, I hope Google crushes him like the insect he is, even if I'd rather see him in prison.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
F!, 29 May 2012 @ 5:11pm

google is evil
When someone tells me to google something, I use Ixquick, "The world's most private search engine". Never forget Google is in bed with the CIA.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Groove Tiger (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 7:31pm

Re: Re: Re:
You sir have infringed on the trademark of the Bark�, the internet log cutting service.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Groove Tiger (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 7:32pm

Re: Re:
"If you don't trust me, why don't you go Bing it."

"Go Bing yourself."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
hmm (profile), 29 May 2012 @ 7:35pm

Re: google is evil
Well I hope the CIA is a gentle lover and attends to google's needs, otherwise google is going to go out and find itself someone younger, fitter and filthier.....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DC, 29 May 2012 @ 9:59pm

Re: Re: Almost there
Don't feed the linux troll.

Oops, I am.

You do know that MacOS is a Unix kernel, right? There's scripting and a command line there with everything you need. Oh, and Objective C is lightyears beyond C++.

So it will fully support someone with a very high level of skill and understanding of computers.

Not a Mac fanboy. I dislike all fanboisms. Linux Fanboism is no exception.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DC, 29 May 2012 @ 10:13pm

Re: Google
I agree he seems to have a case. I'm not sure he should have a case in a sane world.

How is any company supposed to police people's daily conversations?

Additionally, not only would it be impossible, but it would be a living hell for the general populace if they had to adhere to trademark restrictions in their casual conversations.

I'm really torn on this, and I'm not sure there is a clean legislative or even judicial solution.

I don't think Xerox should have to police the general popular cultural use of Xerox to mean copy in order to prevent Cannon from marketing their copier as a "Xerox" machine.

On the other hand, I also don't think Xerox should be able to market copying as "Xeroxing".

It's a puzzle.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DC, 29 May 2012 @ 10:18pm

Re: Re: Glossed the most important part of the story
He may or may not have a working business model. Lots of people sue over what they think will be a working business model, regardless of if it is likely to ... actually ... work.

I think whether he could actually make money if Google didn't shut him down is pretty much beside the point. The point is whether "Google" is generic, and also, whether the rules for "generic" should be as they are.

I'm not defending Google. In a post upstream, I have expressed how I am torn on this issue, and the guy seems to have a valid case under current law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 10:28pm

Re: Re: Re:
Quacking.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 10:30pm

Re: Re: Re:
This. This is the problem.

Branding for any company that doesn't want to sound like a porn studio is tricky.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DC, 29 May 2012 @ 10:32pm

Re:
If you look at my comments on this article, you will see I am not supporting Google.

I agree that this guy is domain squatting, which is sleazy.

1) Being sleazy does not require relinquishing all of your rights. (Should it? well ...)

2) I could be mis-remembering, but when YAHOO! was the predominant search engine, I don't recall a lot of people saying "YAHOO! that". "Google that"' without regard to a particular branded search engine, if in common use, presents a problem. It is in common use.

3) I think in most of these generics trademark battles, I don't agree that the culturally prevalent product should lose trademark, but I also believe that the culturally prevalent product should not be allowed to usurp a category with their brand. I am not suggesting this has happened.

4) There are brands who are trying to usurp words, not just brands. See Monster Cable. This needs to stop, and it needs to stop at the legislative level with penalties for trivial litigation at the least.

This is a tough one to write laws for that make sense and be consistently applied.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 May 2012 @ 10:45pm

Re: Glossed the most important part of the story
Basically he is trying to say that Google shouldn't get to keep their trademark so that he can mooch off of their popularity.

And so he can do what anyone with half a brain and access to any search engine can do. Though I don't like trademarks in general and don't think Google should be taking his domains, that's potentially 750 fewer useless links to show up every time I search for something... on Google.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 30 May 2012 @ 12:24am

Re: Re:
It's a GIMP. I have seen plenty of gimp-suited pixels in my time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TtfnJohn (profile), 30 May 2012 @ 9:33pm

Re: Re:
Dear DC,

I'm writing to inform you that you have violated the trademark on "Monster Cable" (tm) by writing this post. Please note that we shall be adding a second count as you had to think of the words "Monster Cable" (tm) at least once as your wrote the post.

You may avoid the embarrassment of appearing in court and the 200% certainty that you will lose this action by remitting a certified cheque or money order to this office by 10am June 1st and an apology witnessed by a notary public in the amount of $25,000,000.00. It will also be necessary that you acknowledge and agree that we own the words "Monster" and "Cable" used in that or any other order in this context or not. Further, you promise and certify that you will promote and make known to all and sundry that ownership of the words "Monster" and "Cable" are our exclusive property in particular to the word pirates of Websters Dictionary and the OED and to "pirate Mikey".
We also accept payment via Visa, MasterCard, American Express and PayPal.
We look forward to receiving your payment within the next 72 hours.
Sincerely
Alpha Trolls, Barristers and Solicitors
Attorneys At Law LLC
Nuclear Bomb Town, NV

Alternative Offices
Hamilton, Bermuda

"We thank you for your custom and look forward to screwing you blue in the near future. Not that we also offer surgical procedures at half price at our special clinic in Zimbabwe."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nom du Clavier (profile), 1 Jun 2012 @ 5:23am

Re: Re:
NCIS: LA ditto. I'm always surprised to see law enforcement agencies use SkyDrive, but maybe that's the online alternative to losing a thumbdrive?
[ link to this | view in thread ]