Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 26th Mar 2013 17:07 UTC
Google The Swedish Language Council wanted to list 'ungoogleable' as a new word. Google didn't like it. "The word was to be used to describe something 'that you can't find on the web with the use of a search engine', according to the Language Council. However, Google was less than thrilled that a word based on its name had been highlighted by Sweden's 'official language cultivation body'. Google wanted the council to specify that the word's definition only covered searches performed using Google, and not searches involving other search engines." Sadly, the Council decided to scrap the word altogether. Google, get your filthy paws off our languages. It seems like large corporations love to exert pressure on language - Apple tried something similar a few years ago with the abbreviation 'app', something which I exposed for the idiocy that it was. I will use whatever words I damn well please, and so should everyone else. The Swedish Language Council shouldn't even have acknowledged Google's ridiculous request with a response.
Thread beginning with comment 556964
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
App vs. Google
by slhawkins on Thu 28th Mar 2013 18:03 UTC
slhawkins
Member since:
2009-12-26

I believe it's unfair to compare this case to Apple's use of the word App. Google is the company's actual name (obviously), whereas App is/was already a common word prior to Apple's use of it.

As for generic trademarks, I don't believe it matters if they use a prefix or affix, or both. Either way you still have the same root word.

Reply Score: 2