6 ms·

I think this is totally fine by Google. "O.K. Google" would be a trade or service mark of Google, and you'd need to obtain permission in order to use this mark

I think this is totally fine by Google. "O.K. Google" would be a trade or service mark of Google, and you'd need to obtain permission in order to use this mark in an advertisement. The way the ad depicts BK and Google "working together", to speak a favourable description of a BK product, suggests some sort of Google endorsement for BK. Without that endorsement being approved, it's right that Google would act to stop the ad from suggesting or using an endorsement. From my point of view, this is pretty risky for BK to do so. And either they didn't understand the risks, or they knew the repercussion would not be expensive for them, or they just decided to take the risk. To give BK the benefit of the doubt from a strategic perspective, maybe the thinking was, "We know Google will react negatively or shut it down, but that reaction will also get coverage, and will promote talk of our ad even further. Thanks Google!" Still, I'm not marketing person, but that type of thinking, seems to me sort of like "poke the bear" for benefit, and seems quite bizarre to me. I feel it's strange if that is really how marketing people calculate.

kuschku 10y ago
The interesting question is if "Google" is even still a trademark of Google. Considering many dictionaries list it as "to google: to search in the internet with a search engine, e.g. Google® or Bing®", one could argue it has become generic, and the invocation isn’t actually "O.K. Google: ", but "OK, google: ", using it as imperative form of a verb. That said, this argument is today very silly, as it relies on the letter-of-the-law interpretation, and wouldn’t fly in most courts yet. In a few years, with "to google" being used more commonly, it might actually.
- nix0n 10y ago
  This is something that Google is actively working to prevent, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_(verb)#Etymology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_(verb)#Etymology
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
marcosdumay 10y ago
> "O.K. Google" would be a trade or service mark of Google It is an utilitarian mark. You can't trademark those. Or better, you can, you just don't get protections against utilitarian uses, like other manufacturers using the same mark for compatibility or companies using it to access the service.

kuschku 10y ago

The interesting question is if "Google" is even still a trademark of Google. Considering many dictionaries list it as "to google: to search in the internet with a search engine, e.g. Google® or Bing®", one could argue it has become generic, and the invocation isn’t actually "O.K. Google: ", but "OK, google: ", using it as imperative form of a verb. That said, this argument is today very silly, as it relies on the letter-of-the-law interpretation, and wouldn’t fly in most courts yet. In a few years, with "to google" being used more commonly, it might actually.

nix0n 10y ago
This is something that Google is actively working to prevent, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_(verb)#Etymology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_(verb)#Etymology
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

marcosdumay 10y ago

> "O.K. Google" would be a trade or service mark of Google It is an utilitarian mark. You can't trademark those. Or better, you can, you just don't get protections against utilitarian uses, like other manufacturers using the same mark for compatibility or companies using it to access the service.