Branding guidelines and the word "Google"

[Michael Gundlach]

Hi,

I'm a little worried about AdBlock's potential violation of Google branding requirements, because the branding document emailed to us developers was unclear in AdBlock's case.

The word "Google" isn't in the name or description, but the Verified Author is "chromeadblock.com" and the descriptions mention "AdBlock For Chrome".

I'm assuming the branding requirements don't care how the word "Chrome" is used, and no (tm)s are needed.  Please let me know whether AdBlock is in violation!

Thanks in advance,

Michael

[Scott Fujan]

Recently, there was a post where someone asked for legal advice on this forum and was promptly told not to. However, I feel like this is more of a technical issue because of this part of the message:

"You'll be notified if your item has been removed from the store for branding violations. You can certainly make changes to your item, republish, and have it re-reviewed for compliance."

The extension would be completely removed without a warning. I think that it would make more sense to give a 24 hour warning or something along those lines.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium-extensions" group.
To post to this group, send email to chromium-...@chromium.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to chromium-extens...@chromium.org.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-extensions/?hl=en.

[Michael Gundlach]

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Scott Fujan <sc...@fujan.name> wrote:

Recently, there was a post where someone asked for legal advice on this forum and was promptly told not to.

Hmm; that was an out-of-the-blue question about the legal implications of the Google Chrome OS Terms.  This is trying to follow a specific request by Google to read and understand their guidelines.  I'm pretty sure this is a legitimate place to ask for clarification.

Maybe another way to phrase this would be "Please update the documentation to clarify whether it applies to the word "Chrome" in addition to the phrase "Google Chrome".  Chrome isn't listed as a trademark, but Google Chrome is, so I assume I'm doing the right thing.

In any case, even if someone official does reply with "don't ask legal advice", I'll know what steps to take next :)

 

The extension would be completely removed without a warning. I think that it would make more sense to give a 24 hour warning or something along those lines.

I'd certainly agree that would make for much better developer relations :)  And wouldn't cause so much angst among those of us who want to play by the rules.

Michael