{"id":5436,"date":"2018-01-23T01:55:43","date_gmt":"2018-01-23T05:55:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ncjolt.org\/?p=5436"},"modified":"2020-06-04T20:52:50","modified_gmt":"2020-06-04T20:52:50","slug":"battle-verbs-ninth-circuits-reconciliation-verbing-trademark-law-practices","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/articles\/battle-verbs-ninth-circuits-reconciliation-verbing-trademark-law-practices\/","title":{"rendered":"The Battle of the Verbs: The Ninth Circuit&#039;s Reconciliation of &quot;Verbing&quot; with Trademark Law and Practices"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"page\" title=\"Page 1\">\n<div class=\"layoutArea\">\n<div class=\"column\">\nIn its recent decision in Elliot v. Google, the Ninth Circuit reinforced Google\u2019s trademark significance against claims that the mark \u201cgoogle\u201d should be canceled under the Lanham Act due to the public\u2019s verb usage of the trademark. The public\u2019s \u201cverbing\u201d of popular marks has become a particularly onerous problem for internet and technology trademark owners like Google, who want to encourage their products\u2019 integration into pop culture while still maintaining control of their mark. The court\u2019s holding that evidence of verb usage, without more, is not sufficient to prove that the trademark has succumbed to genericide is a step in the right direction in reconciling older trademark practices with modern language use and the evolving realities of internet marketing.\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In its recent decision in Elliot v. Google, the Ninth Circuit reinforced Google\u2019s trademark significance against claims that the mark \u201cgoogle\u201d should be canceled under the Lanham Act due to the public\u2019s verb usage of the trademark. The public\u2019s \u201cverbing\u201d of popular marks has become a particularly onerous problem for internet and technology trademark owners <a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/articles\/battle-verbs-ninth-circuits-reconciliation-verbing-trademark-law-practices\/\" class=\"more-link\">&#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[5,81],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5436"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5436"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5436\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7000,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5436\/revisions\/7000"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5436"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5436"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5436"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}