Comments on: Are You Guilty of Genericide?

By: David

David — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:35:01 +0000

A children’s TV show in the UK on the BBC, Blue Peter, used to have to avoid using trademarks at all, so cellotape was referred to as “sticky-back plastic”. I wonder how many trademarks they used accidentally, like Hoover…

By: Rebecca

Rebecca — Fri, 08 Jul 2011 14:42:20 +0000

This was an interesting article. I never thought about brand names that are now generic words. I wonder, “How long did it take for the ‘brand names’ to become generic words?” It’s something to think about when you think of a company or product name.

By: AE

AE — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:13:34 +0000

what happens when the company’s trademark name is the same as the product trademark that is getting “genericided” by the public? The product diversification under the company’s trademark becomes an uphill challenge. Imagine Kleenex corporation launching Kleenex gloves (for dishwashing), Kleenex steelwool pad, etc. How does the “genericided” product trademark impact the company’s ability to brand new product categories diversification? Should the company still use the company’s “corporate” trademark on new product extensions despite the fact that the public is genericiding the original well-established product? Is that a good leverage or a heavy luggage for product diversification?

By: Lamanai

Lamanai — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 09:44:32 +0000

I don’t agree on this suggestion of “non-genericiding” pointed out in the article. I’m in the same boat with those of you who think that this phenomenon serves label owners as a natural and remarkably strong effortless marketing tools, albeit unintentional it is. Genericided brand names associate a well-established product. It is not a degradation of the company or weakening of the product, it is an honour directly expressed to the label owner by public (unless the genericided brand name is used in negative connotations of course), not speaking of the fact that this behaviour recruits potentional customers and product users.

Anyway, I am a bit suspicious of some famous writers having even signed a kind of contract with some companies to point out their products in their successful or expected-to-be-successful books.

I would also like to thank LGW for their interesting post.

And sorry for my English I am not a native speaker.

By: LGW

LGW — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 06:53:53 +0000

Aspirin and heroin are actually special cases, perhaps unique – Aspirin wasn’t “genericided,” and is still under trademark in much of the world.

Bayer made chemical weapons in WWI. As part of the treaty that ended WWI, Bayer lost the trademark on Aspirin and Heroin in the US as punishment.