Hacker News Reader

Comment by dreamux | Hacker News Reader

I think its good for users to associate "App Store" with a generic place to find and download applications on any platform; like the terms "program" and "browser" it helps to have standard ways of communicating basic concepts of computer/device use. Its a benefit to _everyone_ (Apple, Android, Microsoft...) that users can more easily interact with their systems sans training.

View on HN

Trademarks and branding are strange things. One would assume that giving a term wide-spread use would be beneficial to everyone, but it seems that it's bad for companies. I still don't quite get it myself...

For example, "Google" as a verb:

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/10/do-you-google.html

I assumed that "Google" as a verb is a good thing for Google. It would imply that they've managed to get a huge mindshare. Google's lawyers disagree.

Because you can lose legal muscle behind your name if it becomes such common use that users might use the word without knowingly referencing your company's brand.

Kleenex is the staple case.

Q-Tips are another one, IIRC.

Or, of course, Spam (but Hormel has been enlightened on the topic so it hasn't been a legal issue AFAIK).

Another classic one is Band-Aid.

thermos.

kerosene.

xerox. (fedex?)

So the problem is that you can't prevent others from using it?

Consider:"Bing google engine, for all your googling needs. If you ever need to google something, use Bing!"

This video is 2 years old now, but still pretty funny:

http://www.collegehumor.com/video/5072264/googling-with-bing

It would be an interesting case if Google ends up becoming a legally generic term for search engine. Would the company end up changing it's name? Would there be Microsoft Google (formerly Bing) and Google Google?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com