Thank you for using JustAnswer. I am researching your issue and will respond shortly.
I'm sorry to hear about your situation, but as the law stands, you would almost certainly lose if they took you to court. You see, "Google" is a made up word by the Google Corporation, and a federally trademarked one at that. Even though you add a word to that, that does not then necessarily make it "safe". Rather, courts look to see if there's a "likelihood of confusion" between the use of your mark and another mark. To analyze whether a particular situation has developed the requisite "likelihood of confusion," courts have generally looked at the following eight factors:
The first five of these factors are examined in every trademark infringement action. The last three factors are the most common additional factors that are considered by a court.
Now the fact that "Google" is a dictionary word does not automatically diminish the strength of the mark, although it could.
Rather, the dictionary term does indicate a verb to search, using the Google search engine, rather than any generic search engine.
It is possible that a trademark could lose trademark protection (which it would HAVE to in order for your use to not be infringing). A trademark can become "generic" through use (examples include "Kleenex" and "Thermos")
So the trademark application getting this far would mean nothing and I should quit?
But note that those examples have been court cases that have involved many years of litigation to get to such a judicial determination of trademarks having lost their protection.
A trademark application, if not "final", could be contested (which this one appears to be). The main issue is that it appears clear that you're using the "Google" trademark (again, the dictionary definition applies to the trademark itself, not the other way around, which is a big distinction) and as such, you almost certainly would not win.
That is, it would be a MAJOR shocker and something that all the trademark journals (and in a larger sense, the business journals and other insiders) would be talking about and scratching their heads as to why that actually occurred.
So while it is possible that you could be successful, it would be a major shift in trademark jurisprudence, and as such, I think it would be highly unlikely.
What do you advise? canceling two months of work and money?
There are situations where the case against the "little people" is far more tenuous, and the larger company most likely would not win. Monster Cables threatened (and actually filed lawsuits) against businesses with "Monster" in the name, including Monster MiniGolf. Those cases probably would not win, but this one is one where Google would almost certainly win, unless you could show that the term has become generic. As a practical matter, that would involve years of litigation and hundreds of thousands of dollars (as Google has a very significant interest in keeping up that trademark, they would spend whatever it took, and they have the money to do so).
I wouldn't say throw away all the work, but rather come up with a name that is actually generic...
BeerDetective or something like that.
(I'm sure that you have brainstormed for a long time on this)
Any reference to GoogleBeer should be taken down, however, as that could land you in hotwater.
Ok sir, with sadness I say thank you for your time :(
*hot water... my space bar does not work sometimes.
My pleasure. As a beer lover myself, and a small business owner, I wish I could have given you better news, but the law is what it is. If you have any other questions, please let me know. If not, and you have not yet, please rate my answer AND press the "submit" button, if applicable. Please note that I don't get any credit for my answer unless and until you rate it a 3, 4, 5 (good or better). Thank you, XXXXX XXXXX good luck to you!
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).