<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: You can&#8217;t google, you have to Google</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jeffnolan.com/wp/2006/08/14/you-cant-google-you-have-to-google/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jeffnolan.com/wp/2006/08/14/you-cant-google-you-have-to-google/</link>
	<description>Jeff Nolan&#039;s take on investment, innovation, entrepreneurship and the technology industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 06:44:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Marman</title>
		<link>http://jeffnolan.com/wp/2006/08/14/you-cant-google-you-have-to-google/comment-page-1/#comment-17084</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Marman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2006 17:40:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffnolan.com/wp/2006/08/14/you-cant-google-you-have-to-google/#comment-17084</guid>
		<description>As Anshu mentioned, there is a real legal reason they are doing this. Basically, the point of trademark is to protect designations of source. When something becomes generic, it is no longer worthy of protection because it no longer designates source. 

I touched on this re: the Web 2.0 trademark debacle... http://slashstar.com/blogs/tim/archive/2006/05/26/The_Web_2_0_Trademark_Debacle.aspx</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As Anshu mentioned, there is a real legal reason they are doing this. Basically, the point of trademark is to protect designations of source. When something becomes generic, it is no longer worthy of protection because it no longer designates source. </p>
<p>I touched on this re: the Web 2.0 trademark debacle&#8230; <a href="http://slashstar.com/blogs/tim/archive/2006/05/26/The_Web_2_0_Trademark_Debacle.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://slashstar.com/blogs/tim/archive/2006/05/26/The_Web_2_0_Trademark_Debacle.aspx</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anshu Sharma</title>
		<link>http://jeffnolan.com/wp/2006/08/14/you-cant-google-you-have-to-google/comment-page-1/#comment-16511</link>
		<dc:creator>Anshu Sharma</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Aug 2006 15:39:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffnolan.com/wp/2006/08/14/you-cant-google-you-have-to-google/#comment-16511</guid>
		<description>Yes, it is an honour and a mark of success that your brandname becomes the category description itself. This is a problem everyone wants to have some day. As Guy Kawasaki says, I want to invest in a start-up that will one day have DOJ busting it for monoply.

But once you get there, you want to protect your brandname. Otherwise your brand outlives you and others profit from it. Key examples of &#039;lost value&#039; in brands include  Bikini, Yo-Yo, Trampoline, Linoleum, Zipper and Escalator. They are no longer considered protected brands.

I agree with you on Oracle vs RSI.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, it is an honour and a mark of success that your brandname becomes the category description itself. This is a problem everyone wants to have some day. As Guy Kawasaki says, I want to invest in a start-up that will one day have DOJ busting it for monoply.</p>
<p>But once you get there, you want to protect your brandname. Otherwise your brand outlives you and others profit from it. Key examples of &#8216;lost value&#8217; in brands include  Bikini, Yo-Yo, Trampoline, Linoleum, Zipper and Escalator. They are no longer considered protected brands.</p>
<p>I agree with you on Oracle vs RSI.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://jeffnolan.com/wp/2006/08/14/you-cant-google-you-have-to-google/comment-page-1/#comment-16269</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Aug 2006 00:40:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffnolan.com/wp/2006/08/14/you-cant-google-you-have-to-google/#comment-16269</guid>
		<description>All valid points, but let&#039;s not overlook the fact that Coke, Band-aid, Kleenex, and even Xerox have done very well over the years by institutionalizing their brand awareness through language. 

There&#039;s a difference between the brand and the trademark insofar as value creation is concerned... were it not so your employer would still be call RSI.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All valid points, but let&#8217;s not overlook the fact that Coke, Band-aid, Kleenex, and even Xerox have done very well over the years by institutionalizing their brand awareness through language. </p>
<p>There&#8217;s a difference between the brand and the trademark insofar as value creation is concerned&#8230; were it not so your employer would still be call RSI.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anshu Sharma</title>
		<link>http://jeffnolan.com/wp/2006/08/14/you-cant-google-you-have-to-google/comment-page-1/#comment-16236</link>
		<dc:creator>Anshu Sharma</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 20:17:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jeffnolan.com/wp/2006/08/14/you-cant-google-you-have-to-google/#comment-16236</guid>
		<description>I am surprised it took Google so many years to realize this. Trademarks are lost &amp; have been lost by a company not taking steps from preventing it from being used as a generic term. That&#039;s why you have to say Xerox Copier, Coca-Cola Beverage, Hot Pockets breakfast sandwiches, Band-aid bandage etc. 

The real question is: Has Google already lost the fight by being a mute observer all these years? If so, can I ask people to Google my name on Yahoo! 

(For the inquisitive reader, there is more material on Wikipedia under Genericized Trademark.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am surprised it took Google so many years to realize this. Trademarks are lost &amp; have been lost by a company not taking steps from preventing it from being used as a generic term. That&#8217;s why you have to say Xerox Copier, Coca-Cola Beverage, Hot Pockets breakfast sandwiches, Band-aid bandage etc. </p>
<p>The real question is: Has Google already lost the fight by being a mute observer all these years? If so, can I ask people to Google my name on Yahoo! </p>
<p>(For the inquisitive reader, there is more material on Wikipedia under Genericized Trademark.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

