I know some brand names, such as kleenex lost their protected designations to become words representing a generic product. But can this also happen if the brand name is used as a generic verb. For example, “I Tivo’d that show last night” or “I Googled the information”. Another, “I photoshopped an image.” Can you preserve the noun designation without preserving the verb designation of a word. Canyou protect a brand name from becoming a verb the same way you can protect it from being generic noun?
Well, there was the dude on the SDMB a few years ago that couldn’t stop talking about Hoovering womens’ nipples in the interests of pleasuring them.
You mean like using “xerox” as a verb instead of “photocopy”?
Duh.
Re protecting the noun and not the verb, I believe that’s what happened to Spackle, since other brands are labeled “spackling compound”.
"Spack·le (spkl)
A trademark used for a powder to be mixed with water or a ready-to-use plastic paste designed to fill cracks and holes in plaster before painting or papering. This trademark often occurs in lowercase and as a verb in print: “Two young men quietly spackled and whitewashed the walls . . . for an exhibition” (New York Times). "
Kleenex has not lost its protected designation. It is still a registered trademark owned by Kimberly-Clark Corporation. Only a court ruling or an administrative ruling by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office can remove that protection.
As to whether you can protect the verb, yes you can, but you have to do that specificly in the application.
There are many ways that a name can fall into a grey area. American Airlines and United are both American airlines.
To protect each use you have to make clear what you are claiming.
The Red Cross for example has dozens of pictures in their application.
Well, you can try.
The main tactic seems to be strongly objecting any time anyone uses your brand name as a generic term. For example, the Xerox company will have their lawyers send a letter to the station objecting if a local TV reporter uses “xerox” as a generic term on the air. And whether the reporter referred to “a xerox of the document” or “xeroxing some documents”, the letter would be sent in either case. They would object to either version, claiming improper use of their brand name.
Xerox’s lawyers will generally demand an on-air correction & apology; they won’t get that, but the station will send a letter back apologizing, stating that they have reprimanded the reporter, and sent a memo around to all their other reporters reminding them not to do this. And Xerox’s lawyers will put this away in their file, showing that Xerox has not abandoned their brand name and are ‘vigorously defending’ its use; for use in court if that is ever challenged. (Must be one heck of a big file they have by now!)
From a business perspective, I’ve never quite understood why they’d want to prevent their name from becoming a household word.
Trademark lawyers frown very strongly about verbing trademarks. To them, the only legitimate use is an modifer: Kleenex tissues, Hoover vacuum cleaner, Caterpillar tractor.
Can you protect the brand name if people start verbing it? Sure. Xerox manages. People have been xeroxing things for years, yet Xerox is a legitimate trademark. The problem is that it can be more difficult to defend if you let it happen. So Xerox will write you a stern letter if they catch you saying you xeroxed something.
Note that the letter is what’s important, not your use. If Xerox lets it slide, then Nokia can call their machines xeroxers and Xerox runs the risk of losing the trademark. If Xerox sends the letter, they can prove they defended the trademark, one requirement necessary in keeping it. At the same time, Xerox is not going to sue anyone who uses xerox with a verb (unless they make copies). Why? What if they lose? It’s not worth the risk as long as they send the letter.
Similary, Kimberly-Clark can lose their trademark on Kleenex if they don’t defend any non-standard usages they become aware of (i.e., “She used a kleenex to wipe off her makeup”) if a competitor wants to force the issue.
Finally, competitors usually respect trademarks of other companies. Everyone knows trademarks are valuable and if you start calling your copies a “xeroxer” someone might use a trademark of yours and try to make it PD.
From the Federal Trademark Anti-Dilution Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1125©(4):
Because if it’s a household word, they can’t retain exclusive rights to using it for their brand name.
In other words, their competitors could legally use that ‘household word’ for their product. So all the advertising Kimberly-Clark has done over the years is wasted, because their competitors can sell “Puff kleenix” and “Scott kleenix” and even “Wal-Mart kleenix”.
During my sportswriting days, I received a polite request from the Velcro folks because of a story I wrote on bloodless bullfighting.
Because once it does, it’s basically analogous to entering the public domain. Then your competitors can use it too.
I had to look it up just now to see what the generic term for Velcro is. “Hook and loop fastener” ain’t gonna catch on any time soon, so I think those Velcro folks have their work cut out for them.
Like… arousal is just around the corner?
Not being familiar with bloodless bullfighting i have to ask, what’s the velcro connection?
I could be wrong, but I don’t believe this for one minute. The station is likely to pass the letter around and laugh at it and then throw it in the garbage. Yes, it’s a letter from a lawyer, but it alleges absolutely nothing that can result in liability for the station.
This is more of an irrelevant aside, but when Thomas Edison was pushing for direct current use, as opposed to George Westinghouse’s alternating current use, Edison tried to smear Westinghouse when alternating current was used in the first electric chair. Edison encouraged the use of the verb “to westinghouse” to mean “to be put to death by electric chair.” The verb never caught on. The chairs did, though.
Westinghouse won the conflict, ultimately. If you don’t believe me, stick your finger in a light socket and see for yourself. Did you feel an alternating current coursing through your body as you died from electrocution, or was it a direct current? That should settle any question!
As what happened with trampoline.
Ehm, I don’t know of anybody who googles using anything but google.
At least in this neck of the woods. When people use for example “terra’s search engine”, they say “terra’s search engine” (well, strictly speaking, they say “el buscador de terra”, but the thing is, google is understood as being more general than any other search engine)
So that specific example doesn’t look particularly appropiate.