5 ms·
Nope, it isn’t special. Indeed your example is why companies try very hard to prevent words from changing meaning. Google for instance no longer means “search w
by _benedict 4y ago
Nope, it isn’t special. Indeed your example is why companies try very hard to prevent words from changing meaning. Google for instance no longer means “search with Google” but to search the internet for something, with Google or some other service, and history is littered with such examples - including ones that became so prevalent they lost their trademark protection.
- mikebenfield 4y agoI don't understand why you think this is a good counterexample. Google is still trademarked. If I make a search engine and say, "You can use my search engine to Google things," I'm probably in the wrong both legally and ethically.
- _benedict 4y agoOpen source isn’t trademarked, and probably isn’t possible to trademark. So trademark status isn’t relevant here, only the change in usage.
- mikebenfield 4y agoYou're literally the one who made the analogy of "open source" to trademarks, and now you're trying to shoot down my explanation of why your analogy doesn't work by saying trademark status is irrelevant... Good grief.
- _benedict 4y agoNo, you brought up Cheerios, and I brought up a counterexample to your claim that such invented terms occupy some special status where they don’t or shouldn’t change meaning. I then mentioned loss of trademark protection to further evidence that such words change meaning.
- robertlagrant 4y agoTo my understanding[0] Google is still trademarked. [0] https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/google_retains_its_trademark_though_the_name_is_used_as_a_verb_appeals_cour https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/google_retains_its_t...
- _benedict 4y agoYep, I didn’t use them as an example of a company that has lost their trademark, only that in common usage often means something different to its original intent.
- robertlagrant 4y agoFair enough. I'd argue that Google pretty much does just mean "use Google".