When consumers begin to label a product category with a brand name, it would appear that the marketer has achieved the ultimate in brand notoriety. In the U.K., people use the word Hoover to refer to a vacuum cleaner—any vacuum cleaner, be it from Hoover or from Electrolux or any other manufacturer. The word is used as a verb—“to do the hoovering.” There is a very thin dividing line between main-taining salience and top-of-mind awareness and becoming generic. When the latter occurs, the courts may decide that a brand name can no longer be considered or used in a proprietary manner. Escalator, yo-yo, thermos, cellophane and spam are examples of brands that have lost their name exclusivity and have become generic. The word aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) is generic in the United States, though everywhere else in the world only Bayer can legally use the word. On the other hand, the Rollerblade Company took action to protect its brand name when the media started to use the term rollerblading and promoted instead the use of in-line skating. Similarly, the Xerox Corporation has run advertising encouraging people to use the term to photocopy and not to xerox. Although this branding paradox affects relatively few brands, it is perhaps more common than might be thought. Recently, Austria’s Supreme Court ruled that, in that country, Sony can no longer claim exclusive trademark rights for the name Walkman given that it had passed into common usage once it had been defined in a German dictionary as any portable stereo player