Comments on: Verbing your trademark away, and why no one was ever caught yahooing http://www.digitalsolid.com/2006/11/04/verbing-your-trademark-away-and-why-no-one-was-ever-caught-yahooing/ Marketing Technology Musings and Tips by Jeff Larche Sat, 17 Sep 2011 02:41:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Andrew http://www.digitalsolid.com/2006/11/04/verbing-your-trademark-away-and-why-no-one-was-ever-caught-yahooing/comment-page-1/#comment-1336 Andrew Wed, 28 Feb 2007 18:49:19 +0000 http://www.digitalsolid.com/2006/11/04/verbing-your-trademark-away-and-why-no-one-was-ever-caught-yahooing/#comment-1336 From a marketing standpoint having a "genericized trademark" is a dream. But then think about the ramifications that could bring to your bottom line. Your brand would be a household name, and you'd have the benefits that come with that. You’d have a pretty large brand moat that competitors would have to swim across prior to competitions with your business. An easy example of this would be Coca Cola, and Pepsi. Both of them have massive brand moats. Imagine trying to take market share or retail shelf space from those two; close to impossible. In the good ol' US of A, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark" rel="nofollow"> a generic mark forms part of the public domain and can be commercially exploited by anyone.</a> Legally speaking wouldn't that create a drawbridge over your moat and into your castle? Marketers in that situation would be livin' the dream, at first. But in time competitors would swarm the castle and ravage the brand until nothing was left. It's happened before; there was a time when Jungle Gym, escalator, and cellophane were all "trademarked". Based on the ramifications alone Google being <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_(verb)" rel="nofollow"> added to the Oxford dictionary</a> could be a bad idea. In my opinion I think that it's a fine line to tread and it's something that will keep Google busy for some time. From a marketing standpoint having a “genericized trademark” is a dream. But then think about the ramifications that could bring to your bottom line.

Your brand would be a household name, and you’d have the benefits that come with that.

You’d have a pretty large brand moat that competitors would have to swim across prior to competitions with your business. An easy example of this would be Coca Cola, and Pepsi. Both of them have massive brand moats. Imagine trying to take market share or retail shelf space from those two; close to impossible.

In the good ol’ US of A, a generic mark forms part of the public domain and can be commercially exploited by anyone. Legally speaking wouldn’t that create a drawbridge over your moat and into your castle?

Marketers in that situation would be livin’ the dream, at first. But in time competitors would swarm the castle and ravage the brand until nothing was left. It’s happened before; there was a time when Jungle Gym, escalator, and cellophane were all “trademarked”.

Based on the ramifications alone Google being added to the Oxford dictionary could be a bad idea.

In my opinion I think that it’s a fine line to tread and it’s something that will keep Google busy for some time.

]]>