Subject:
|
Re: Kego Constructopedia
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 8 Sep 1999 22:27:46 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Brian B. Alano <alano@kiva.net&Spamcake&>
|
Viewed:
|
2041 times
|
| |
|
|
If we like Constructopedia, but are worried about TM infringement, how about
Constructopaedia?
Jim Thomas wrote:
> Ok, we can't use Constructopedia (TM) so why not Constructionary! Anyone
> trademarked this yet? Is that too much of a ripoff? :-)
>
> JT
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lehman@javanet.com [mailto:lehman@javanet.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 1999 12:15 PM
> To: lego-robotics@crynwr.com
> Subject: Re: Kego Constructopedia
>
> In lugnet.robotics, "Brian B. Alano" <alano@kiva.net> writes:
> > [...]
> > I have added a few pages to it, documenting (and linking to) assemblies
> > that that others have posted. It wouldn't take much to re-organize it as a
> > Constructopedia. Since a WikiWeb is openly collaborative, it would be nice • ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > if someone (who is aware of Wiki architecture and style) would create a • set
> > of Constructopedia guidelines. THIS COMMUNITY could help a lot by • ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > discussing specific requirements the Constructopedia should meet.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Brian,
>
> Just a couple of general comments on word usage...
>
> If at all possible, it is probably a good idea to avoid using the word
> "Constructopedia" in a context such as this. I don't want to see you or
> Andy or anyone else here get into trouble for accidentally misusing someone
> else's trademark, so I'm compelled to point out a couple things...
>
> Note that the term CONSTRUCTOPEDIA® is owned by the LEGO Group and may or
> may not also be licensed or co-owned by the MIT Media Lab (where the name
> originated).
>
> On March 18, 1997, the LEGO Group applied for a registered trademark on the
> term "Constructopedia" with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The
> registration was granted on February 2, 1999.
>
> On March 12, 1997, the LEGO Group registered the domain CONSTRUCTOPEDIA.COM,
> and, as well all know, has been using the word "Constructopedia" judiciously
> on the www.legomindstorms.com website and in printed materials accompanying
> the MindStorms products.
>
> So in other words, CONSTRUCTOPEDIA® is, unfortunately, a privately owned
> name and therefore probably shouldn't be used as if it were a generic term.
>
> HTH,
> --Todd
>
> [Disclaimers: I am not a laywer, I do not represent the LEGO Group or the
> MIT Media Lab, and I am not involved with the Constructopedia project. The
> above is information obtained publicly via InterNIC and USPTO searches that
> I do periodically as part of my admin and information management duties at
> LUGNET.]
>
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Kego Constructopedia
|
| (...) I am reminded of the fake ROLEX(r) watches that say "ROIEX" hoping no-one will notice. I don't care if it would hold up in court or not, that's just plain sleazy (-: No, as long as we're in the toy, educational, or educational toy areas we (...) (27 years ago, 8-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | RE: Kego Constructopedia
|
| Ok, we can't use Constructopedia (TM) so why not Constructionary! Anyone trademarked this yet? Is that too much of a ripoff? :-) JT -----Original Message----- From: lehman@javanet.com [mailto:lehman@javanet.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 1999 (...) (27 years ago, 8-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
10 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
|
|
|
|
