I don't know about Swedish law, but out of principle, even stupied IP laws should protect the things they are set to protect, or the laws should be overturned.

I don't know about Swedish law, but out of principle, even stupied IP laws should protect the things they are set to protect, or the laws should be overturned. Given that the Language Council (Språkrådet, right?) is trying to _regulate_ language, I think that trademark protection should be _considered_ in this case. This wouldn't be the case if this was a purely descriptive dictionary. OTOH, looking at the Council's new entries from earlier years http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spr%C3%A5kr%C3%A5dets_nyordslista http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spr%C3%A5kr%C3%A5dets_nyordslis... which have for example "facebooka" and "twittra", so I find Google's objection quite weird.