Is the term: "Ad Grants" trademarked by Google?[ Edited ]
April 2015 - last edited April 2015
As far as I know, the term: "Ad Grants" ...is NOT trademarked by Google.
The reason I ask is because I'd like to build an independent sales site targeting 501c3s, specifically looking for help with setting up and managing their Ad Grant accounts, and I want to offer them special reduced pricing that I do not want my regular clients to see.
In other words, if I register a domain like adgrantsconsultant.com, is the Google Legal Team going to come after me? Given we are in a PPC forum, I think its safe to assume we all understand that there are always alternatives, like ppcconsultant.com, but Ad Grants is really it's own unique thing, and those are the correct keywords to use in this case, because I'm not going to offer Bing etc - just help with Ad Grants - so it's just a question of trademark, or violating TOS, etc.
So what's the consensus out there?
Hello @Rob V;
Google Grants is a trademark owned by Google;
I don't think Google checks every domain name registered. However, Google is, naturally, as any trade-name owner, concerns about the proper use of its brand name. So, if the bot finds a Google's brand name linked / associated with inappropriate (web) content, Google might take action. (See below.)
Having said that, please note if you use the term "Google Grants" as part of the content of your page, you must follow Google's trade-name guidelines
Let me also ping our top contributor, @RobertCoats who specializes on the Grants program.
Did you find any helpful responses or answers to your query? If yes, please mark it as the ‘Best Answer’
Re: Is the term: "Ad Grants" trademarked by Google?
Right. I would expect it to be, but 'Ad Grants' is a generic term, and probably the reason they didn't mark it. Or at least there is no record of it in the USPTO database.
>I will say that others that have tried similar approaches no longer have their websites up and running.
LOL Should I queue the scary music? I'm not afraid of those big bad lawyers, at least not in this case. Trademark law is really one of the simplest black or white issues... you either own the word mark or you don't. And in this case, Google doesn't. So if they have any issue with anything here, they should go back to their own style guide and start getting consistent with how they call things, so as to avoid any confusion on the part of those trying to help them service their clients