Google, you win
yovia.com
Google, you win
1–10 of 13 posts
Re: Google, you win
#2Google's lawyers are right.
You seem to be claiming that you only have a problem with this common phrase being used in a certain context, but unfortunately for your trademark, it is exactly that context in which the usage is especially common.
Far from not acknowledging that point, Cooley, the Google legal firm, deals with it head on. As they say in their letter: "The phrase is particularly common in the online marketing and advertising context..." They then go on to provide references to some of the countless examples.
The lesson here is be careful what you ask your lawyers to do for you. Some lawyers will do anything legal you want, even if it's a bad idea. A bad lawyer might file a trademark on the word "the" used in a certain context... if the client is willing to pay. That doesn't mean the trademark is defendable, even if it does manage to get past the hurdle of being granted.
Re: Google, you win
#3Being able to trademark common phrases and then sue people for using them seems to me like a ridiculous thing to try and do, so the system seems to be working here. I certainly can't see this as a problem of small businesses not being able to protect their IP. It looks more like someone trying to adapt the patent troll business model to trademarks.
Re: Google, you win
#4We have the rights for social media services. We don't care about people using it as descriptive text, we care when they use it to market advertising services.
Re: Google, you win
#5We have the rights for social media services. We don't care about people using it as descriptive text, we care when they use it to market advertising services.
Unfortunately, the case Google (or more specifically Cooley) is that the term is still too vague, regardless of the limit of your context.
This seems analogous to a company trying to trademark "Skip the lines" when advertising an online store.
Re: Google, you win
#6We have the rights for social media services. We don't care about people using it as descriptive text, we care when they use it to market advertising services.
You should never have been granted a trademark on a phrase this common. In the court of public opinion, trying to own a phrase that is already common parlance, not something you made up, is asinine. You're wasting your investors money on trying to own this phrase, and you're likely going to get shouted down here. GLWT.
Re: Google, you win
#7Honestly, I don't think this trademark should ever have been granted in the first place. It's definitely way too common.
Re: Google, you win
#8We have the rights for social media services. We don't care about people using it as descriptive text, we care when they use it to market advertising services.
This blogpost also doesn't appear to include the entire response from Cooley, LLC. Is there more after is lists the definition of the idiom and several other major places where the idiom is used? I imagine with the way the previous paragraph concluded, there would be more.
Also, is "Spread the word" really the "most integral part of [y]our branding and marketing"? The phrase doesn't seem inherently or distinctly creative, nor can I really see a second meaning the immediately invokes your product/services. Surprised you were granted the trademark at all.
Re: Google, you win
#9No offense, but your case sounds somewhat similar to patent trolls. "Spread the word" is your trade mark, huh?!
What's next you guys gonna trade mark the word "Dear" and sue anyone who starts their email with that word?
Re: Google, you win
#10We have the rights for social media services. We don't care about people using it as descriptive text, we care when they use it to market advertising services.
I find it hard to believe you were among the first to use this phrase for social media and/or advertising services.
It seems in fairly widespread use even for that use case.