Google just walks into reputation management and trademark problems one after the other, and today is no exception.
Not too long ago it was their attempt to force people to give up domains legally registered using the acronym “g.m.a.i.l” or gmail, which Google uses for their email service.
The Polish Poets are still in business, and apparently Google also lost in other countries.
So today news is breaking about Google’s new “Open Social” platform for social media web developers. The big problem is that Google don’t own the trademark, or even a lot of the concept behind it, and they certainly don’t own their own SERPs (search engine results pages)
Google Open Social?
But as far as I can see, Google does not own the phrase “Open Social”
Open Social Web
Brad Fitzpatrick, formerly of Six Apart, and with Google since August 2007 was mentioned as being involved with Google’s new initiative in the Techcrunch article from September, and was also mentioned on the Open Social Web Bill of Rights website and one of his articles was referenced, but at that time he, or Google were referring to the “social graph”.
Open Social? – Cool Concept & Name – I will Steal That
Well that is what it seems to me that Google has done.
Whilst the Google technology may well enable many of the concepts from the published Bill of Rights, that doesn’t mean they should be able to take the named concept and use it to name a product, especially based upon their previous history with trademarks and domain names.
From the Open Social Web Bill of Rights
I wonder what they think of their concept stolen by Google to turn into a brand?
I personally think signing something like this over to Google y default is a disservice to the internet, and Google does not own the internet.
This is similar to allowing one company to brand “Freedom of Speech”
Google Don’t Own Their SERPS
I was glancing at my stats earlier, and noticed that I had some incoming traffic for terms like “Google Open Social”
That is actually my post on Open Social Web but also covers lots of reasons why Google owning control of a blogging related service such as Feedburner doesn’t make it more open and actually can harm the development of the service.
Google’s Idea of “Open”
Google’s whole idea of “open” is to have the data available to them to index.
- They don’t really care about privacy
- They don’t care about copyright
- They just want access to all your information
Sometime in the future, Google will have control of how your personal profile is represented online, and in many ways how it is portrayed.
Take for example their innocent little bar of green commonly referred to as “PageRank”, and how as I have written I have been “Defamed By Google”
If this really is a war purely on paid links, and I have clearly stated I do not sell PageRank, then why am I still being defamed?
How do I repair the publicly repaired reputation of my website?
As I believe I haven’t done anything wrong, I can’t honestly file a reinclusion or reconsideration request.
Google, Please Repair My Social Profile
If Google ultimately have all your online activities inter-connected and indexed, they are going to know absolutely everything about you online, and they are quite capable of making mistakes.
If you haven’t read Cory Doctorow’s amazing portrayal of Google, when he asked “What If Google Were Evil” in “Scroogled” I suggest you reserve 20 minutes to do so.
Google $700 per share? I don’t honestly care, though the higher they are, the harder they fall.
Update: Somehow I submitted the wrong URL for this one to Sphinn, so here is a usable button