Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 24th Jun 2011 22:46 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 478523
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: This is a red herring
by Neolander on Sat 25th Jun 2011 06:43
in reply to "RE[2]: This is a red herring"
The question is interesting nonetheless.
Can a company legally use a trademark on a word or expression that has become the commonplace way of describing a concept ?
As an example, I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that in the UK, people don't use "to vacuum clean" all so often. To describe the action of using a powerful electric pump to suck up everything in the floor of a room*, "to hoover" is preferred. Should the Hoover Company have the right to sue all illegal uses of the term ?
* And this reminds me of a webcomic gag about a "suck for a buck" sign and a messy room =_= I spend too much time on the internet.
Edited 2011-06-25 06:45 UTC
RE[4]: This is a red herring
by rhavyn on Sat 25th Jun 2011 06:53
in reply to "RE[3]: This is a red herring"
Should the Hoover Company have the right to sue all illegal uses of the term ?
Yes or they risk their trademark becoming genericized and potentially losing it. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genericized_trademark and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark_dilution to understand why a company must defend it's trademarks and marks it would like to use as trademarks if it wants to keep them.





Member since:
2011-05-12
Did you popularize this term then?