DISQUS

Rodney_Rumford · 1 year ago

While it might be unfair and it is up to legal eagles to wrestle it out; the best practice is to just steer clear of names like facebook, google, twitter, etc. it is only a matter of time before their bigger leagal teams swoop in for the kill.

jessestay · 1 year ago

Great points Rodney - it's too bad that Google didn't approach it the nice
way instead of with such a threatening letter though.

Ali A. Akbar · 1 year ago

aliunt@yahoo.com - My email

Jordy · 1 year ago

IMHO, your friend is in clear violation of a trademark. Something like AppEngineHelp would be less offensive since it's not likely to be confused with the real deal, and I can see why they might let something like that go. If I were Google, I would have done the same thing --after asking nicely, of course. :)

jessestay · 1 year ago

You may be right Jordy. I wish Google could have been nicer about it
though.

rolandksmith · 1 year ago

In order to protect their trademark, Google has to send a take-down letter to anyone who puts up a domain that can possibly be construed as coming from Google. The other names you've cited, if they are indeed non-Google properties, have certainly received the letter and will probably get further legal action. Google's take-down letter is fairly mild when compared to some others that I've seen. It needs to be worded strongly enough that it gets appropriate attention.

Trademarks are very different from copyrights. In trademark issues, it is the responsibility of the trademark owner to defend the trademark. Failure to be diligent in defending the trademark can result in the mark being declared "generic", such as has happened with "linoleum", among many others. The word "Google" is becoming so ingrained in our vocabulary that it's now a verb as well as a noun as well as the name of a company, which must be very worrysome for Google's trademark lawyers.

On the other hand, copyright enforcement is in the purview of the legislature (as set out in the Constitution). Congress sets the rules and manages the rules of engagement / enforcement whereas court litigation is the vehicle through which trademark law is both defined and enforced.

Finally, whenever lawyers get involved, the words "fair" and "unfair" have no relevance...!!

Thanks!
Roland

p.s. The domain name in the blog title is missing an 's'....

jessestay · 1 year ago

Excellent points Roland - I'm familiar with that as well, and you do have a
point on the "fair" vs. "unfair" part with the Lawyers. I do think that
Google should be at least a little more careful with when they unleash those
lawyers though, especially when their unofficial slogan is, "do no evil".

Peeko · 1 year ago

A friend ran into the same situation with Dell Computers. They sent him the same threatening letter almost verbatim when he purchased a domain, containing his last name, Dell, to sell computer parts (I can't remember the exact domain name). Apparently, anyone with the last name of Dell is prohibited from branding anything computer-related with their own name according to Dell Computers. My friend didn't have the legal funds to fight them over it and so created a new website, company name and logo, at his expense.

I can see both sides of the story. On one hand, if I started a company, I'd want the company name to be protected, but on the other hand, I wouldn't feel threatened because someone wanted to imitate me. It's the sincerest form of flattery, isn't it?

They should use the standard, accept no imitations, look for the Google seal or something to that effect. Use it as a positive marketing tool, instead of angering someone, who then tells their friends, who then tell their friends, and before you know it, Google IS evil in the eyes of more consumers than before they sent the legal threat. At the very least, they should reimburse people for the cost of purchasing the domain name. I think they can afford it more than us little guys. It seems like instead of the old way of buying up all domain names that they don't want anyone to own, they wait for us to buy them, then expect us to hand them over free of charge.

jessestay · 1 year ago

Great points pico!

Peeko · 1 year ago

An afterthought: why not require these supposed tradmark infringers to have a disclaimer on their website in big bold letters stating that they are not affiliated with Google or Dell, etc...

Then everyone's happy.

jessestay · 1 year ago

Peeko, I agree - the issue here is Google didn't even give him the chance.
I'm pretty sure he was going to do that.

troy · 1 year ago

"no intention for commercial gain" - what? like you weren't going to put googleads on it? :)

jessestay · 1 year ago

He never made any mention of that. I haven't put google ads on this site,
have I?