Google and genericization of trademarks

Today I read an article with great interest entitled Google ready to fight genericization. It tells how Google is considering placing advertisements to prevent losing the strength of their trademark. I applaud Google for taking this move.

Trademark holders must enforce their marks, otherwise the marks can lose strength. Additionally, if you do not tell a potential infringer to stop, you may not later be able to halt their use of the mark. Furthermore, and perhaps the worst, is that your mark can become "generic" (more about the various strength of trademarks.)

Becoming ubiquitous and well known can be good for a company. It means that the public is well aware of their mark and brand, and identifies the name with the service or good. It can be a problem to be associated with all uses for the good. Companies often use advertisements to police their brands. They basically put the world on notice that their mark is strong, and cannot be used for the generic use. Some common marks which are often incorrectly used to describe something generic include:

Kleenex (for facial tissues)
Xerox (for copiers)
Coke (for soda)

I've noticed for awhile that many people are now using Google as a verb, as in "I Googled my name to see who's talking about me." This is marginally OK, as long as you intend that you used only Google as your internet search engine. If you used Yahoo, then you were using Google to mean "internet search," and that indicates a weakening of Google's mark.

This ad campaign will start to show that Google is concerned about their brand value, and also to show that they are actively protecting their mark. They have such a good and unique name, that it would indeed sad to see it weaken.

Note: I have been using Google as my preferred search engine since 2000. I try the others on occasion, but Google remains the best for good results.

Trademark Safeguard- Trademark Monitoring Service

A friend of mine recently filed a trademark application on their own with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO.) I provided some free advice to help them prepare their trademark application, but I digress.

Within two weeks of filing, they received a notice from Trademark Safeguard, which offers their trademark monitoring service. They will watch trademark filings and notify trademark owner of similar marks via email each week.

I only found out about this because my friend was concerned about the legitmacy of this service. While it is indeed an actual company, my friend was confused whether he actually had to sign up. The form itself looks similar to an official government document.

Their threshold for "similar" is a lot lower than that of the USPTO, so you often get notices for marks that are not really that similar- they just want to make sure you get your money's worth. Anyone with a valuable trademark should have their marks watched through such as service.

The problem I have is that USTPA is perhaps going too far with their solicitations. It looks more like correspondence from the USPTO than from a private company. The header states that it is "Form 104B 01/02 - Supplementary," and names USTPA in full. The font does look similar to the font on correspondence from the USPTO in trademark matters. The letter quotes trademark laws, and warns about allowing similar marks to exist- stating that they may weaken your mark. The letter does not state at all that USTPA is not associated with the USPTO in any form.

The client contacted me because they thought that this was indeed an official communication from the USPTO. The trademark application was filed before the USPTO with the contact info of my law firm as the correspondence address- and the USTPA used the info pertaining to the applicant to contact our client. I have received solicitations for trademark watch services before, and have forwarded them to my clients. I feel that this letter is almost deceptive, and in the end, also too expensive. They charge $395 per year. There are other services that can do so for less money, including your current trademark attorney.