Speaking of Google and trademarks, an interesting article on Google’s own trademarks is “Don’t “Hitchhike”A Ride On Google’s Trademarks and URLs” by Russell Shaw.
Only thing is that he defines a “word mark” as “similar to a trademark, but more of a logo than a business name,” which it isn’t.
I don’t blame him for being confused. The term is not found in the index of McCarthy’s definitive treatment, nor in the INTA glossary on line.
But one thing is for sure: A word mark is a trademark, it’s not “like a trademark.” And describing it as being like a logo is misleading — many logos don’t have any words in ’em at all. In fact, a word mark is nothing more or less than a trademark consisting of a word or words. (See, e.g., American Home Products Corp. v. Johnson Chemical Co., Inc.,589 F.2d 103, 200 U.S.P.Q. 417 (2nd Cir. 1978). If you must. )