In an age when many companies take great precaution in protecting their trademarks, Google has taken an interesting approach. Instead of traveling down the path of Xerox and putting out an ad to stop the genericide of its logo and trademark, it has allowed the term "Google" to be used as a verb. How many times have you said that you "googled" something to mean that you ran an internet search? It has become part of our lexicon to say we "googled" something which has made the mark "Google" generic for the term to conduct an internet search. Indeed, oftentimes the search may be run on another search engine (e.g. Yahoo!), but is still thought of as "googling." As such, the mark "Google" has lost its ability to be an indicator of source. Yet, the powers that be at Google do not seem to have a problem with the genericide of their name.
Recently, a TIME article wrote about how Google "doodles" its logo. Such "doodling" would make most trademark attorneys blanche. In a prior blog post, I discussed how simplifying one's logo helped make it more international friendly. In that blog, I discussed how it is necessary to have a logo that is easily recognizable and is able to quickly get in front of a potential consumer's eyes. In addition, that blog discussed the ever decreasing attention span of potential consumers.
The TIME article on Google's doodles got me to thinking about the intersection between trademark rights and the smaller attention span of consumers. I believe that Google may be on to something and leading a new way to define one's logo. Maybe the idea of changing one's logo design would not be such a bad idea. After all, it makes a consumer want to return to Google's page to see what the doodle team did next. Instead of a staid and blunted logo, Google created an ever changing logo to attract attention to its services.
The doodling of its logo in connection with the genericide of the name, has turned the concept of trademarks on its head. Can other companies be far behind in mimicking Google's irreverence for its trademark rights in order to create a bigger buzz about its goods or services? Everyone knows about Google and its search engine. Has Google decided it was better to have everyone think of "google" as a generic term than to attempt to initiate an anti-genericide campaign? Is it better to have everyone know your name even when using a competitor's goods or services? Time will only tell if others will follow Google's path.
No comments:
Post a Comment