Is it because it reaches a critical mass of usage, so the people get to take it back?
It’s not my point but that’s literally how it legally works in the US. That’s why Velcro insists on calling their product “Velcro brand hook and loop fastener”
That’s actually pretty common too. Just off the top of my head: Cleanex, Xerox and Nintendo have all had to do similar things to protect their trademark.
They really started padding it towards the end to get to 50 but the first half or so of this listicle has a lot of good examples, quite a few that I didn’t know
TIL about trademark erosion. Also, thanks for a proper response.
Trademark erosion, or genericization, is a special case of antonomasia related to trademarks. It happens when a trademark becomes so common that it starts being used as a common name and the original company has failed to prevent such use.
I guess Nintendo fought it successfully by getting the world to call the thing a “game console” rather than calling it a Nintendo. Hoover failed to defend the verb “Hoover” and lost it.
In this case, it just seems like the win is for Taco Bell and their efforts to gain, use and profit from the term. And that makes it feel a little gross and brutish. They could prove me wrong though.
Yeah, “super bowl” also shouldn’t be trade marked, It’s far too generalized to be reasonable. Zoidberg should be as that is a character in a show and should be claimed by the creators with exception given to people whom have that name in real life referring to their own products.
I’m lovin’ it also shouldn’t be trademarked. It’s literally just an expression of joy.
I don’t get why this has to be a difficult concept. McDonald’s didn’t create anything new. The NFL didn’t fabricate the concept of extraordinary dishware. It is absolutely nonsense that anyone with enough money and influence can just choose a couple pre-existing words out of the English language and claim ownership.
What makes it fucking stupid? Is it because it reaches a critical mass of usage, so the people get to take it back? Something else?
As an aside, I have a new product idea: Zoidberg’s Super Bowl of Cereal: I’m Lovin’ It!
It’s not my point but that’s literally how it legally works in the US. That’s why Velcro insists on calling their product “Velcro brand hook and loop fastener”
That’s actually pretty common too. Just off the top of my head: Cleanex, Xerox and Nintendo have all had to do similar things to protect their trademark.
Escalator was once a brand name.
They really started padding it towards the end to get to 50 but the first half or so of this listicle has a lot of good examples, quite a few that I didn’t know
https://www.impactplus.com/blog/50-everyday-words-that-started-as-brands-and-trademarks
TIL about trademark erosion. Also, thanks for a proper response.
I guess Nintendo fought it successfully by getting the world to call the thing a “game console” rather than calling it a Nintendo. Hoover failed to defend the verb “Hoover” and lost it.
In this case, it just seems like the win is for Taco Bell and their efforts to gain, use and profit from the term. And that makes it feel a little gross and brutish. They could prove me wrong though.
Sometimes a soulless megacorp is the one in the right.
https://clickhole.com/heartbreaking-the-worst-person-you-know-just-made-a-gr-1825121606/
It’s a food item and a day of the week.
Yeah, “super bowl” also shouldn’t be trade marked, It’s far too generalized to be reasonable. Zoidberg should be as that is a character in a show and should be claimed by the creators with exception given to people whom have that name in real life referring to their own products.
I’m lovin’ it also shouldn’t be trademarked. It’s literally just an expression of joy.
I don’t get why this has to be a difficult concept. McDonald’s didn’t create anything new. The NFL didn’t fabricate the concept of extraordinary dishware. It is absolutely nonsense that anyone with enough money and influence can just choose a couple pre-existing words out of the English language and claim ownership.