Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 24th Jun 2011 22:46 UTC
In the News As we reported earlier this week, Apple is busy sending out cease and desist letters to small, defenceless projects to defend its trademark application (it doesn't actually own the trademark yet) for 'app store'. This has prompted many a discussion over the trademarkability of such a generic term, and over the origins of the abbreviation 'app'. Who came up with it? How old is it? To my surprise - the abbreviation is much older than you'd think, and in a way, it illustrates quite well the demise of the programmer. What? Read on.
Permalink for comment 478528
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: This is a red herring
by Neolander on Sat 25th Jun 2011 07:06 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: This is a red herring"
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

Well, that page which you provide has some good examples of what I'm meaning by "should they have the right?".

I'm personally happy that I can use the short and convenient "aspirin" instead of "acetylsalicylic acid", no matter who actually manufactures it. Excessive trademarking, on the other hand, tends to encourage putting lots of different names on the same thing. Like Doliprane, Efferalgan, etc... are all different trademarks on the same old paracetamol.

Question is : which would you prefer, given the choice ? Having the right to call every proprietary software repository "app store", or sticking with "proprietary software repository" as a generic name (which is as complicated as any generic name gets) and a myriad of trademarked names for the same thing ?

Reply Parent Score: 2