<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Are these words real?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://flagrantdisregard.com/are-these-words-real/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://flagrantdisregard.com/are-these-words-real/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2011 23:08:51 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nichole</title>
		<link>http://flagrantdisregard.com/are-these-words-real/#comment-136762</link>
		<dc:creator>Nichole</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2007 18:00:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flagrantdisregard.com/index.php/2007/03/12/are-these-words-real/#comment-136762</guid>
		<description>Ooooooh what a touchy subject for someone like myself.  In college we were taught that the people dictate what is in the dictionary, not the other way around.  Therefore, it is only a matter of time before words such as &quot;blog&quot; and &quot;google&quot; are accepted/published in dictionaries.  Additionally, not every dictionary is the same, as I&#039;m sure you&#039;re well aware.  Some dictionaries may include such words, some may not.  This is life.  This is why one must own at least 2 different kinds of dictionaries (IMHO).

As far as Google putting up a stink about the trademark and not allowing the word to be a verb, this is ridiculous.  Sure, it&#039;ll be sad that such a huge corporation will lose some tiny fraction of money because the masses are using their name as a verb, but then, what about words like &quot;Kleenex&quot; (often used universally to mean &quot;tissue&quot;) or using &quot;Coke&quot; or &quot;Pepsi&quot; as all-encompassing words for soda?  Shouldn&#039;t the folks at Google just be happy that their search engine is the premiere engine on the web, so much so that we feel the need to refer to any web search as &quot;googling&quot;?  And anyway, I don&#039;t personally say I &quot;googled&quot; anything unless the searching did occur at Google.com.  ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ooooooh what a touchy subject for someone like myself.  In college we were taught that the people dictate what is in the dictionary, not the other way around.  Therefore, it is only a matter of time before words such as &#8220;blog&#8221; and &#8220;google&#8221; are accepted/published in dictionaries.  Additionally, not every dictionary is the same, as I&#8217;m sure you&#8217;re well aware.  Some dictionaries may include such words, some may not.  This is life.  This is why one must own at least 2 different kinds of dictionaries (IMHO).</p>
<p>As far as Google putting up a stink about the trademark and not allowing the word to be a verb, this is ridiculous.  Sure, it&#8217;ll be sad that such a huge corporation will lose some tiny fraction of money because the masses are using their name as a verb, but then, what about words like &#8220;Kleenex&#8221; (often used universally to mean &#8220;tissue&#8221;) or using &#8220;Coke&#8221; or &#8220;Pepsi&#8221; as all-encompassing words for soda?  Shouldn&#8217;t the folks at Google just be happy that their search engine is the premiere engine on the web, so much so that we feel the need to refer to any web search as &#8220;googling&#8221;?  And anyway, I don&#8217;t personally say I &#8220;googled&#8221; anything unless the searching did occur at Google.com.  ;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Hungry Ghost</title>
		<link>http://flagrantdisregard.com/are-these-words-real/#comment-136646</link>
		<dc:creator>The Hungry Ghost</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2007 07:43:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flagrantdisregard.com/index.php/2007/03/12/are-these-words-real/#comment-136646</guid>
		<description>Wiki has just made it into the latest version of the Oxford English Dictionary.

You should not use Google (TM) as a generic term for search, or they could lose the trademark, and other companies could refer to their search products as google.

Asprin is an example of this - Asprin used to be a trademark, until it was lost die to overuse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wiki has just made it into the latest version of the Oxford English Dictionary.</p>
<p>You should not use Google (TM) as a generic term for search, or they could lose the trademark, and other companies could refer to their search products as google.</p>
<p>Asprin is an example of this &#8211; Asprin used to be a trademark, until it was lost die to overuse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tanyetta</title>
		<link>http://flagrantdisregard.com/are-these-words-real/#comment-133655</link>
		<dc:creator>tanyetta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2007 00:20:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flagrantdisregard.com/index.php/2007/03/12/are-these-words-real/#comment-133655</guid>
		<description>i&#039;m still in awe that you install virgin versions of applications.  you&#039;re my hero! :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i&#8217;m still in awe that you install virgin versions of applications.  you&#8217;re my hero! :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lady S</title>
		<link>http://flagrantdisregard.com/are-these-words-real/#comment-133638</link>
		<dc:creator>Lady S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2007 23:25:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flagrantdisregard.com/index.php/2007/03/12/are-these-words-real/#comment-133638</guid>
		<description>Google is a proper noun, and I believe they are making an effort to get the word to use it as such.  I recently read an article about using it as a verb and how Google (the corporation) is actively trying to get people  to only use &lt;i&gt;Google&lt;/i&gt; when they mean &lt;i&gt;Google&lt;/i&gt; and not when they mean searching using another engine.  Not that I am the word police, but you did ask.

It seems to me it takes so long to get into a dictionary that we have moved onto other newer words.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google is a proper noun, and I believe they are making an effort to get the word to use it as such.  I recently read an article about using it as a verb and how Google (the corporation) is actively trying to get people  to only use <i>Google</i> when they mean <i>Google</i> and not when they mean searching using another engine.  Not that I am the word police, but you did ask.</p>
<p>It seems to me it takes so long to get into a dictionary that we have moved onto other newer words.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

