news Court Finds ‘Google’ is Not Generic

[Lox]

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on May 16, 2017, that Google has not become a victim of its own success – that is, its Google trademark is still an enforceable brand for an online search engine and has not become generic.

Xerox, dumpster, Kleenex, thermos. All are infamous examples of company’s trademarks nearly becoming a victim of their own widespread success. When a trademark becomes so ubiquitous and so widely used by the general public as a noun or verb instead of as a brand (adjective) of goods or services, it becomes a generic term. When that happens, the term ceases to be a source identifier and is just another word in the English lexicon.

Many experts believed that Google may be the next famous term to lose its trademark protection, simply by becoming too popular a term. All too often, consumers use the mark generically, for example by saying they “Google something” or “check Google.” Such references are against the intentions of a brand owner and can have a devastating effect on a brand.

This becomes a problem for companies trying to protect their trademark rights because ..,

Read more: ipwatchdog

 

[namelancer]

I had a similar question regarding what has now become an ubiquitous term ''Greenergy''

 

[Lox]

Greenergy is distinctive enough and the dictionary does not yet include it, in the future - who knows.

------

Simplified TM explanation (full text):

Two basic requirements must be met for a mark to be eligible for trademark protection: it must be in use in commerce and it must be distinctive.

The first requirement, that a mark be used in commerce, arises because trademark law is constitutionally grounded in the congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. The Lanham Act defines a trademark as a mark used in commerce, or registered with a bona fide intent to use it in commerce. If a mark is not in use in commerce at the time the application for registration is filed, registration may still be permitted if the applicant establishes, in writing, a good faith intent to use the mark in commerce at a future date. Both at common law and under traditional Lanham Act registration procedures, exclusive rights to a trademark are awarded to the first to use it in commerce.

The second requirement, that a mark be distinctive, addresses a trademark's capacity for identifying and distinguishing particular goods as emanating from one producer or source and not another. Trademarks are traditionally divided into four categories of distinctiveness: arbitrary/fanciful, suggestive, descriptive, and generic. If a mark is categorized as either arbitrary/fanciful or suggestive, it is considered to be inherently distinctive and exclusive rights to the mark are determined solely by priority of use. A trademark that is categorized as descriptive is only protectable as a trademark if it has acquired a secondary meaning in the minds of the consuming public. Secondary meaning is also necessary to establish trademark protection for a personal name or a geographic term. Generic terms are never eligible for trademark protection because they refer to a general class of products rather than indicating a unique source. A mark may be generic ab initio and refused registration, or it may become generic over time through use.

(full text)

 

[namelancer]

Greenergy is distinctive enough and the dictionary does not yet include it, in the future - who knows.

Well, there is only one way of finding that out, @Loxline