Wordsmith Talk |
About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us | |||
Register Log In Wordsmith.org Forums General Topics Miscellany the trouble with "G00GLE"
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
OP http://makeashorterlink.com/?T17F21FF4
Google calls in the 'language police' By Jonathan Duffy BBC News Online
Note the "TM"
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?
Google is best known as an internet search engine but its tentacles have spread to range of other web applications.
There's Google News - a news portal; Google Webquotes - a database of sayings; Google Glossary - a catalogue of words and phrases; and the spin-off shopping site Froogle.
Yet amid all this activity there is one thing Google is trying to steer clear of - the dictionary.
The effect is to suppress a range of common words and therefore censor part of the English language
Sidney I Landau
In the US Google has mutated into a verb. Singletons will "google" a new boyfriend or girlfriend - run their name through a search engine - to check them out. People now talk about "googling" and "being googled".
On an episode of ER, shown on Channel 4 in the UK this week, colleagues of Dr Susan Lewis talked of "googling" her blind date.
And singer Robbie Williams says US women who initially reject his amorous advances often have a change of heart when they run his name through a search engine.
"I've since been told: 'That girl googled you because she knows who you are now.' So hurrah for googling!" says Williams. "Science got me laid."
Search and destroy
But what's good news for Robbie is becoming a headache for folk at Google HQ. The company's lawyers are trying to stamp out this sort of language.
Understandably a fan of internet search engines
Paul McFedries, who runs the lexicography site Word Spy, received a stiffly worded letter from the firm after he added "google" to his online lexicon.
The company asked him to delete the definition or revise it to take account of the "trade mark status of Google". He opted for the latter.
Google's problem is one of the paradoxes of having a runaway successful brand. The bigger it gets, the more it becomes part of everyday English language and less a brand in its own right.
Just as we talk about "hoovering" instead of vacuuming, people have started to say "google" to mean search. The word has become an eponym.
Talk isn't cheap
It's like an inversion of that Oscar Wilde saying: "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about."
Hoover failed to clean up on its trade mark
Companies like Xerox, Kleenex, Portakabin and Rollerblade have teams of lawyers furiously firing off letters to media which mistakenly use their name in a generic sense.
It's all about protecting their brand, says Elizabeth Ward, a trade mark lawyer. "You have to see it in context of how much they spend on advertising. If you have a big, big brand such as Google you have to say what's that brand actually worth.
"Once it becomes just a word, it erodes the value of that brand."
For the likes of Google, Hoover's experience is a cautionary tale - it has essentially lost the exclusive right to its name.
The language police
"Its trade mark has not been removed," says Ms Ward, "but it seems that if Hoover were to contest its use as a generic then a court would remove it."
Definitely not Rollerblades
In fact, our language is littered with words that once used to be brands. Escalator, pogo, gunk and heroin are all examples, as is tabloid, which was originally registered by a drugs company in 1884 and came to mean "small tablet".
But the current obsession on building brand status has ushered in a new phase in language. So much so, that experts now fear trade mark lawyers are trying to police the otherwise natural evolution of the English diction.
Lexicographer Sidney I Landau, says dictionary publishers in the US are being bullied by lawyers to leave out words that are being freely spoken on the street.
"Dictionaries should reflect the use of words and their authors shouldn't be afraid to identify that and define it as generic," says Mr Landau.
Seize the moment
"In future the effect might be to mislead people by only giving the trade mark meaning. The effect is to suppress a range of fairly common words and therefore censor part of the English language."
Ken Storey of the Institute of Trade Mark Attorneys rejects the idea his members are acting as censors on what we say.
"Everyone has the right to protect a trade mark," he says.
In Britain people may feel they want to seize the opportunity for free speech while they still can. The verb "to google" has yet to take off on this side of the Atlantic, but it seems Brits could use it with impunity for the time being, says Liz Ward.
That's because in Europe, at least, Google's trade mark is still pending.
You know, this sort of thing always puzzles me. I understand that brand names are important to their owners, and the generification (!) of them can water down their impact, but gee whiz. If it's entered the vernacular, it's entered the vernacular and I would hate to see a bunch of pricey lawyers get away with stopping dictionaries from doing their job.
I don't know, it sounds less like language police than trademark protection. Since most dictionaries give some info on word origin surely it would be simple to say, for eg.
Kleenex - 1)trademarked brand of facial tissue 2)now popularly used as a generic term for facial tissues.
Or whatever the correct dictionaryese would be. It respects the trademark while indicating both meanings of the word.
There must hundreds of generically-used words which used to be brand names...popsicle, lollipop, polaroid...they can try, but they'll never stop the process...
What ever became of comic strip "Barney Google" - with the
"Goo-goo-googly eyes"?
( He had a wife three times his size
She sued Barney for divorce
Mow he's living with his horse.)
Very interesting problem posed here, both legally and lexicographically.
Would someone please explain to me why the corporation attorneys want to jump on generic use of their product? In what ways would it be harmful to do so? I would think having your product be the first and foremost that people think of would be beneficial and not contrarily so. If people think, "I need to buy some Kleenex," well, wouldn't they be more inclined to buy, first and foremost, Kleenex rather than off brands? I'd take advantage of the fact in advertising: "Super Summer Bonus Sale! Buy the real Kleenex on Sale!"
And I would think Google would be honored to appear in the dictionary. So where would the harm be in having this search engine be the first one in everyone's minds?
Also: I liked the suggestion someone made above about including the copyright information into the dictionary. Seemed a practical way around the problem.
And: Why can't writers use product names in their articles? That seems absurd to me.
Google is, right now, a known quantity, a standard-- there might be better search engines, but google looks for specific things, and works well in many cases..
if google becomes a generic word for 'search engine' then any search engine of any sort, or speed could call its self a google.. and could hitch hike on googles efforts to make a name for its self.. eventually google would mean 'trash' and since the company is not likely to lose it contol over the word all over the world, at the same time.. it would mean both the real Google (good) and the google wanna-be's who cash on the free use (and lead to google meaning trash) would exist at the same time.
Bayer (years ago) spent a lot of money marketing asprin as wonder drug... now any one can market asprin (in US!) and we can by 'generic asprin' (since this drug is regualated, all of them do conform to basic requirements, but most things are not as regualated as drugs!)
there are several different brands of childrens interlocking blocks on the market.. Lego brand, are far and away the best blocks.. if Lego became generic, how would you know if the blocks you were buying were any good? you'd have to look for other information to make sure you continued to get the same quality -- a quality that the company has led you to expect, and that they have cemented into your brain with one specific name.
these name are so important, that even when companies are sold, they buyer often buys the name too..
have you noticed? Checks brand cereal is now made by 'General Mills', not by ralston purina.. (i think they still make the dog food and other animal foods, but the 'sold off' there humam food division.. and general mills kept the almost the same design for the box, and didn't change the name..
people get used to a name, a name has value (good or bad depends on the product!) and losing a good name is a loss to the company!- you can bet GMills paid for the name and box design elements not just for the 'recipe'
Thanks, of troy, for explaining that, especially the possibility of imitators using the product name in their own possibly inferior product promotion.
I notice that it is *not Google®, but Google™, which means that they have applied for a registered trade mark but have not yet received that official protection.
OP In reply to:there are several different brands of childrens interlocking blocks on the market.. Lego brand, are far and away the best blocks..
lego:fischertechnik::yugo:mercedes benz
(I'd like to apologize for making my comment in the inherently oppressive SAT format)
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Moderated by Jackie
Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Statistics Forums16Topics13,913Posts229,580Members9,187 Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
Newest Members Karin, JeffMackwood, artguitar, Jim_W, Rdbuffalo
9,187 Registered Users
Who's Online Now 0 members (), 332 guests, and 0 robots. Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days) A C Bowden 23
Top Posters wwh 13,858Faldage 13,803Jackie 11,613wofahulicodoc 10,713tsuwm 10,542LukeJavan8 9,931Buffalo Shrdlu 7,210AnnaStrophic 6,511Wordwind 6,296of troy 5,400
Forum Rules · Mark All Read Contact Us · Forum Help · Wordsmith.org