Trademark Issues

common words trademarked?

[batleon]

Received this message while trying to load some new ads via the desktop Adwords Editor:

"Due to trademark reasons, we do not allow advertisers to use 'drive' in their Google AdWords ads. This term may be trademarked either for a certain product or service category and may apply only in certain countries."

Really now Google, that seems like a bit much. I've never had any big problems getting certain "trademark" flagged words by editorial after a reasonable explanation. It just get frustrating after a while when you have to explain yourself every time you want to use a common word like "drive".

[justablink]

I use the word drive quit frequently combined with other words using the Adwords Editor. If you are just using drive as a singular word, I'd expect it to be rejected.
justablink

[appi2]

Quite a few UK trademarks for drive. magazines insurance etc.
USA one shows dead.
Try different countries in adwords.

[makee]

You may submit the ads in Adwords and provide your reasons for approval for the words. It always works for me.

[La_Valette]

"United" is trademarked. Thanks to United Airlines, apparently.

[QualityNonsense]

Google's handling of trademarks is ridiculous. This week I'e found I can't use the words 'points' or 'apple', for example, without submitting an exemption request.

[mimmo]

If I am not mistaken, also the word FREE is a trademark. We have all ads with FREE in the keywords listed as trademarks.

[abbeyvet]

Well 'drive' is a bit much!

"Don't want to drive? Trumptown taxis will get you home safely."

[netmeg]

I don't think it's Google's fault so much as the insane trademark policy that lets people trademark words like "drive" and "free" and I can't remember some of the ones I've come across, but they're ridiculous.

[ItsAllBallBearings]

agree with nutmeg - we couldnt use the word "Tigers" because apparently it belongs to MLB. a few other examples within MLB too, but its just ridiculous.

[La_Valette]

Well 'drive' is a bit much!

"Don't want to drive? Trumptown taxis will get you home safely."

"Home" was trademarked at one point. Not sure now.

[QualityNonsense]

IANAL, but...

I don't think it's Google's fault

Netmeg, I have to disagree - I believe it is Google's heavy handed implementation. This quote from Wikipedia explains trademark law better than I:

It is important to note that trademark rights generally arise out of the use and/or registration of a mark in connection only with a specific type or range of products or services.

Put simply, those trademarks are only applicable in certain industries. So why put that hurdle in place for anybody wanting to use the word 'points' or 'free' in an ad? Ridiculous, IMHO.

[netmeg]

Because you may well be right, but why should Google want to get in the middle of a legal spat, regardless of whether or not it's justified, which costs time and money no matter what the turnout? If Google DID make that kind of a decision, they'd open themselves up to all kinds of attempted legal action - and given the deep pockets involved, heck, there'd be people filing suit just hoping they could get few thousand as a nuisance settlement. It costs time and money just to get something thrown out of court. No, it's stupid that we have to go through hoops to use common words, but I can't fault Google on that one; the stupidity's not theirs.

[QualityNonsense]

why should Google want to get in the middle of a legal spat

Of course, that's not in their interests.

But I'm not aware of other self-serve ad vendors - from newspaper classifieds up - who apply the same logic and disallow common words which happen to be trademarked.

Take two random examples of self-serve ads without similar blocks:

Craigslist search for 'Apple' [newyork.craigslist.org]
Village Voice classifieds search for 'Apple' [newyork.backpage.com]

[phranque]

Well 'drive' is a bit much!

i'll bet "Windows" is trademarked...