Archives

Becoming Generic

6:13 PM April 7, 2009

With the awesomely hot weather we've been having lately, I figured it was about time I dusted off my Rollerblades. There's nothing like having some fun with an active outdoor activity when the weather is so nice. As I was looking for my blades, I remembered that they aren't actually Rollerblade brand skates, but some other brand of inline skates. Rollerblade is one of those brand names that has become synonymous with the product it represents. I don't know anyone in my group of friends that refers to inline skates as anything but Rollerblades. And it's not that we don't know the difference. Rollerblade has just become a generic noun for inline skates.

It looks like there is even a term to describe this phenomenon: genericized trademark. After thinking about this a bit, I don't think this circumstance has been particularly beneficial for Rollerblade. You'd think that the popularity required to make a brand name a genericized trademark would mean that the brand has a lasting dominance in that market. But even though Rollerblades were pioneers of the inline skate sport, I don't know that they are a leader in the market today. The last few times I've looked at inline skates in stores there weren't many, if any, Rollerblade brand skates for sale. It could just be that the brand isn't as common around this part of the world these days (I believe the Rollerblade company is based in Italy) or maybe the market is just flooded with many more options compared to the original days. Either way, it doesn't seem like the market dominance you would expect from a genericized trademark is there for Rollerblade today.

While contemplating this topic a bit, I tried to list all the other genericized terms I could think of. Here is the list I came up with:

• Rollerblade
• Kleenex
• Saran Wrap
• Wite-Out
• Jacuzzi
• Band-Aid
• Chapstick
• Tupperware
• Frisbee
• Thermos
• Scotch Tape

Then there are also the (probably) dozens of tools that are named after the companies that pioneered them, like Crescent wrenches and Philips head screws. There is also the phenomenon of brand names becoming verbs, like Xeroxing or Googling. Do you think these occurrences are beneficial for the companies owning those trademarks? In one sense you would think such broad use of your trademark would mean constant publicity for your brand. But the Wikipedia page mentions that "unless a company works sufficiently to prevent such broad use of its trademark, its intellectual property rights in the trademark may be lost". I take this to mean that anyone could then use the now generic brand name for their product labelling. So maybe having a brand name that becomes too synonymous with your product isn't always a good thing.

This phenomenon also appears to be localized based on where a brand is offered. I was discussing this with someone I know online from Australia, and he mentioned that Saran Wrap is not a brand out there, but Glad Wrap was and they had essentially genericized that brand name the same way. And this makes perfect sense. I wonder how widely used a generic brand name has to be before it becomes officially recognized in a dictionary as part of the language? What is your take on this whole thing, and can you think of any more good examples of genericized trademarks?

This entry posted by Graham in Main Journal Tags: Branding, Rollerblading

All content © Graham Davis 2012  •  Subscribe