OK to play with the brand name to induce word of mouth transmission?

Google is known to represent its brand name in a unique way each day. For Valentine's day, they decided to do something a little different.

Google dropped the L from its name in its daily doodle in homage to an obscure poet who is famous for one romantic line of poetry.

This created an uproar, as the relationship was not immediately made apparent. Bloggers did their thing - writing about their hypotheses to the mystery. It made its way across the internet, being brought to the forefront of many sites such as digg.

Google later explained their intentions in their blog, putting an end to the foray. The final result was not only a general heigtened awareness and exposure for the brand, but also their blog being placed in the spotlight. How many readers who found out about this by word of mouth, or by finding it on digg, knew that Google had a blog? Or how many gave a second thought to giving it a read?

As MediaPost points out, Google has the market share to gamble with its universally recognized brand. This risk paid off for them, but it must be remembered that it is a risk taken with one of a group's most valuable assets: its brand name! Therefore, it must be done with utmost care, and only when the benefits outweigh the risks.