Google Doodles Obvious Nod To...Some Games...Or Something...
from the no-names-for-games dept
Google users have long noticed the search page's "doodles", where Google redesigns their logo as an homage to something having to do with that day's history (Yes! I managed to link to a Techdirt story from two-thousand-and-freaking-two! Beat that, other Techdirt writers!). Often times these are nods to the birthdays of famous or important artists, scientists, or other historical figures and holidays. And if you have spent the past week or so living on Earth and aren't a rock, you can probably guess what these past days' doodles have been about.
But, as reader Jason writes in to note, the big Goog is apparently chilly on actually, you know, mentioning what the drawings are for when you roll over the image:
The two theories Jason came up with are that the search giant is afraid to even mention the sporting event in question for fear of reprisal by the committee that oversees said sporting event, or it's a sly poke in the eye at their overly aggressive sue-happy nature. Lord knows if the-games-that-shall-not-be-named are willing to go after gyro shops, a more prominent target like Google would seem to be a no-brainer. Now, it would seem to me that a prominent page like Google's home search page featuring the Olym...games-that-shall-not-be-named would be a great source of publicity for the sporting event, but thanks to the chilling effect created through lawsuit happy committees, that publicity is lost.
But, as reader Jason writes in to note, the big Goog is apparently chilly on actually, you know, mentioning what the drawings are for when you roll over the image:
"The image url reference[d] the "opening ceremony" of something. But the tooltip for the image, which any seasoned Google user knows will tell you what's up with the logo that day, simply reads, "Hooray for sports!"
The two theories Jason came up with are that the search giant is afraid to even mention the sporting event in question for fear of reprisal by the committee that oversees said sporting event, or it's a sly poke in the eye at their overly aggressive sue-happy nature. Lord knows if the-games-that-shall-not-be-named are willing to go after gyro shops, a more prominent target like Google would seem to be a no-brainer. Now, it would seem to me that a prominent page like Google's home search page featuring the Olym...games-that-shall-not-be-named would be a great source of publicity for the sporting event, but thanks to the chilling effect created through lawsuit happy committees, that publicity is lost.






Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Do like with the Superblow
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Do like with the Superblow
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Do like with the Superblow
Just wait until our brains are integrated into our electronics, we will be sued for just thinking the names of these things. There was actually a neat short story about this, also I believe linked at techdirt not too long ago.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Do like with the Superblow
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
On second thought, maybe not. I have the impression that just thinking about "those games" makes a lot of people want to puke, nowadays.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Just Curious
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just Curious
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Just Curious
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Games-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Games-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Games-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Games-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Games-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You can trademark any word as it pertains to a specific industry/product, regardless of how long it has been around.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
And you probably managed to breach the Olympics copyright indirectly and made Mike infringe them retroactively. That must be a record!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Spreading the word
After stating only 3 of the great many more instances there are in any conversation of the atrocities committed by those who run not-said event, most people are already agreeing with me about how they should not be supported. When people resist because they like watching the sports, it usually only takes pointing out that something else would step up to take their place because we all like watching the sports. It is just the committee running them currently that needs to be wiped from the face of the Earth.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Hmmm... do you mean...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hmmm... do you mean...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
We should have a 5-ring sport to see who gets the most c&d letters for a single post...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Games
Calling it "the games" is putting the cart before the horse.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Does it?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Does it?
I suspect they are putting up random things in an effort to show how ridiculous it is that we can not talk about the-games-that-shall-not-be-named.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Does it?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Does it?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Does it?
Why on earth would Google be this silly just in their home market?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Thanks to Harry Shearer for the funny in that sentence and thanks for following the insanity of the organizers on his Le Show radio show and podcast for the past several years. http://www.kcrw.com/etc/programs/ls
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Unmentionables
i just want to mention but I can't.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
What Google Should have Done...
or something to that effect.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment