undefined | Better HN

0 pointsphpisthebest3y ago0 comments

>>trademark law demands that one vigorously defend their trademark, lest they lose it.

This myth, and "cant yell fire" are two of the most pervasive false legal statements on the internet.

"Quite simply, the view that a trademark holder must trawl the internet and respond to every unauthorized use (or even every infringing use) is a myth. It’s great for lawyers, but irritating and expensive for everyone else. And when done clumsily or maliciously, it chills free expression."

-- https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/trademark-law-does-not...

0 comments

8 comments · 4 top-level

Closi3y ago· 4 in thread

It’s not entirely a myth, see a list of trademarks that have been “lost” due to insufficient protection or other reasons here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_generici...

There are definitely examples where brandnames have moved into common usage and then lose their trademark.

atchoo3y ago

I can't recall seeing trademark aggression that had anything to do with genericism though. Some marketing copy maybe but not as challenges to other company's marks.

Genericism is within the user/audience/market rather than other businesses. The cause of genericism is total cultural domination - such widespread success that it becomes the noun. I wonder how close "iPhone" and "iPad" might be to genericide.

Is there a test for it? If you put an Android Tablet on a table and asked a test subject to pass you the iPad, I think we can predict the overwhelming outcome.

Closi3y ago

Well if another competitor starts using your protected term and you don’t protect it, it is more likely to become generic.

(Ie if Apple does not protect the word iPhone and then Google and Samsung use the term iPhone for 5 years unchallenged, it risks becoming a generic name for a smartphone)

jakelazaroff3y ago

I mean, yeah, because they probably know what an iPad is and can infer what you meant. That just means the brand name is recognized, not that it’s generic. If you put a Coke on the table and asked the subject to pass the Pepsi (or vice versa) it would probably work too.

kiicia3y ago

No seller of apple fruits is “riding on apple logo/name bandwagon”, it won’t be genericized because of fruit existing as long as memory

Genericization is only for newly invented words/phrases, it’s apple that is actively stealing common words and makes trademarks out of them

Izkata3y ago

> and "cant yell fire" are two of the most pervasive false legal statements on the internet.

IIRC, this one used to be true but was overturned.

Obscurity43403y ago

Come to think of it, are there actually any anecdata or in the caselaw where companies that didn't litigate every potential infringement case sufficiently paid the hypothetical/mythical price of genericizatio. Or whatever the implied threat is...

giancarlostoro3y ago

They still do it as if it were not a myth is the problem.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse