News - Google aims to trademark the word 'Glass'

[crossy]

As I understand it, Google is not trying to trademark the word 'glass', Google is trying to trademark a device (i.e. a logo) which is the word glass in a particular stylised font. Their struggles arise from the fact that glass is at least in part descriptive of the goods for which the mark is intended and that there is no evidence that a consumer would associate the particular stylised font as an indication of origin. Its somewhat being blown out of proportion .

If Google ARE merely trying to trademark the "Glass" logo then that's fine with me. But, all of the reporting I've seen is that Google aren't trying to get a logo through, they're trying to stake a claim to "glass" as THEIR tm. In which case the USTO are definitely correct to tell 'em to take a hike. It's as ridiculous as Apple's "rectangular screen with a bezel" EU trademark from last year.

[Dooms]

Surely they want Glass not glass

[Saracen]

Seems like a transparent attempt to trademark a descriptive term to me, but the trademark office are being a pane, and have seen through it.

I mean, it could never be allowed, could it? Next, someone will be trademarking "doors", or ... well, "Windows".

[jimborae]

Seems like a transparent attempt to trademark a descriptive term to me, but the trademark office are being a pane, and have seen through it.

I mean, it could never be allowed, could it? Next, someone will be trademarking "doors", or ... well, "Windows".

Boom Boom Tiss, he's here all week ladies & gents. lol

In other news Google have revealed they're Glarseholes!!!!

[Gunge]

If Google ARE merely trying to trademark the "Glass" logo then that's fine with me. But, all of the reporting I've seen is that Google aren't trying to get a logo through, they're trying to stake a claim to "glass" as THEIR tm. In which case the USTO are definitely correct to tell 'em to take a hike. It's as ridiculous as Apple's "rectangular screen with a bezel" EU trademark from last year.

I decided I would check the USPTO record - serial number 86008189 'Description of Mark: Color is not claimed as a feature of the mark. The mark consists of the word GLASS in stylized form.' The logo is the same as shown on the Hexus article, a 'futuristic' font where the A has no cross-bar.

[crossy]

I decided I would check the USPTO record - serial number 86008189 'Description of Mark: Color is not claimed as a feature of the mark. The mark consists of the word GLASS in stylized form.' The logo is the same as shown on the Hexus article, a 'futuristic' font where the A has no cross-bar.

Like I said, if it's limited to that logo only and not a "land grab" for the word "Glass" in other presentations, then that's fine with me.

Heck, it's a lot more defensible than that moronic one at the beginning of the year with "King" trying to grab "Candy" and "Saga". And I'm not going to say any more on that otherwise I'll get banned.

Oh, and of course, Apple's affection for the letter "i" followed by a word.