Subject:
|
Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.mediawatch
|
Date:
|
Sat, 7 Feb 2004 05:32:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2139 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.mediawatch, Matthew Miller wrote:
| |
Dave Schuler orrex@excite.com wrote:
| |
If “Legos” grates on you the way “nukuler” grates on me, then you have
my sympathy! Still, someone can refer to “Fords” or “Toyotas” without
causing an uproar, so there is some precedent for pluralized brandnames,
however incorrectly it might apply to LEGO.
|
There’s the exact same technical/legalistic rule against saying “Fords” or
“Toyotas” or “Burger Kings” or “Pentiums” or “Dells” or “Dumpsters”. Or
“Kleenexes” or “Band-Aids”. Again as the original article pointed out. :)
|
Well, there are two things a play here... what people(1) *want* to do, and what
companies *have* to do if they want to preserve their property.
It is my opinion that The LEGO Company *has* to ask people to use the word
“LEGO” as an adjective or else they are at risk of losing their trademark.
I bookmarked this site a long time ago, during one of the previous discussions
on this topic.
http://www.ggmark.com/guide.html
See point 2 in particular. See also
http://www.ggmark.com/protect.html
and in particular
‘A mark may be abandoned “unintentionally,” when the trademark owner fails to
use it properly, or fails to monitor its use by others. “Improper use” is use
which places the mark in danger of becoming generic. Thus, marks should be used
consistently, and distinctively, to enhance their source-identifying function.’
So based on that, TLC have to ask people(1) to use it correctly. (that is, as an
adjective, and distinguished somehow, for example in all caps) What the
people(1) they ask actually DO is a different story, but TLC can’t, in my view,
stop asking.
If you like the company, or if you like the capitalist system in general (2),
you’ll respect the request. Disrespecting it suggests that you dislike at least
one of the two. At least to me it does... YMMV.
It’s just one lawyer’s opinion of course, but it squares with the other research
I’ve done into this, including some caselaw I’m not going to cite at the moment.
And while I am no expert, I do have a trademark of my own that I’d like to
protect(3) so the topic is of some interest.
++Lar
1 - and journalists! Not to say they’re not people.
2 - and with it the notion that it’s legitimate for companies to market, have
a brand identity, advertise, care about their image, want to be distinguishable
from their competition, etc.
3 - Milton Train Works™, a proud member of the
Guild of Bricksmiths™ (4)
4 - Bolding is an acceptable mechanism of
highlighting. So is underlining
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
| (...) There's the exact same technical/legalistic rule against saying "Fords" or "Toyotas" or "Burger Kings" or "Pentiums" or "Dells" or "Dumpsters". Or "Kleenexes" or "Band-Aids". Again as the original article pointed out. :) (20 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
35 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
