I do that, too. I use a blank, lined notepad for my grocery list, and just write brand names.
Tide
Joy
Windex
Coke
etc…
Yes, it’s quicker and easier than writing out “laundry detergent” and “dishwashing detergent” and “glass and multi-surface cleanser” and “pre-sweeted carbonated beverage.”
No guarantees that I’ll actually buy those brands (the Joy, yes, I’m very loyal to my dish soap), but the other stuff I switch brands according to what’s on sale.
Late as usual, appologies.
I deal a little with Trademark Law, but I’m by no means an expert, or even a lawyer. But in my experience almost everyone seems to think that genericisation is a good thing. Very basically, while it’s convienient for us lot, it’s very, very bad for companies.
Not pulling anyone up personally (I’m just as guilty!), just commenting on a couple of your posts.
Actually, the companies involved do mind. Very much. - see below.
Big difference between primary/favoured brand recognition and becoming generic.
(Your comment about not necessarily knowing about other options is especially important in example below).
Besides, it might be the most recognisable and prolific, but lots of people will tell you that (e.g.) Microsoft Windows® aint all that. 
Just goes to show what good products they’re giving us!
(although in theroy you could use “edited” and “searched”)
However, Generic is a BAD THING[sup]TM[/sup]
The reason is because these words (Hoover - Speedo - Photoshop) are all registered Trademarks.
If the trademark becomes a generic term, then the company looses it’s exclusive right to use it.
As Cinnamon Girl has pointed out, it’d lead to other people trying to cash in on the originals success.
Another part of the reason for this is the law that states you can’t trademark a generic term. For example “E-mail”.
Imagine if a company started up and called itself EMAIL. You might not necessarily have heard of Yahoo/Hotmail/whatever, but you’ve heard of e-mail, you could be forgiven for thinking that this one company was it.
Even if an amazing amount of advertising was done to prove that EMAIL is one of loads of e-mail service providers, the law does not accept that enough of a distinction can be made in the mind of Joe Public.
(as you can see in tdn’s ATM card example)
Companies requesting people not to turn their names into verbs or generics are trying to protect themselves.
Imagine the problems for the company if someone like ORACLE became generic.
Not only would they loose exclusive use to “oracle”, but they’d also be prevented from using “oracle” on it’s own.
For example: CELLOPHANE and ESCALATOR were companies that lost their trademarks. XEROX has spent an amazing amount of money trying not to.
It might be one thing to use a trademark as a verb “within the industry” so to speak - for example I might say to a collegue “I photoshopped it” rather than “I fireworked it” or “I Flashed/Swiffed it” - just so they would know which particular program I’d used. That’s unlikely to lead to genericisation, as all parties invovled are aware of that particular usage of the trademark (and that it’s naughty and lazy, oh the fun we have afterwards! :dubious: :D).
However, I’ve frequently recieved “photoshopped” images in my email from friends who’ve done nothing more than open it up in MSpaint and drawn glasses and a moustache on it.
Appart from my friends not realising that Photoshop is an actual product (and why would they?), it isn’t really doing a lot for Adobe Photoshops image.
(Appreciating that it takes a small amount of artistic tallent to do much more regardless of the software.)
Innit really annoying when sommink is the complete opposite of what you thought would make most sense.
:smack: Now you see that’s what happens if you open the window and then piddle about making tea and whatnot. Carry on.
:eek:
Products that used to be Trademarked:
Escalator
trampoline
cube steak
high octane
kerosene
cornflakes
yo-yo
mimeograph
shredded wheat
lanolin
raisin bran
linoleum
dry ice
All of these are products that were, at one time, developed marketed and/or sold by a single corporation. When you heard the term “trampoline,” like or dislike, you instantly knew the quality of the product being offered. Now, anyone can call a trampoline a trampoline and you have to determine each product based upon the reputation of the company.
We as the public help determine what is trademarked and what isn’t. Too common and it’s lost.
Yes, I agree that it’s pedantic and entirely unnecessary to refer to products only in their properly trademarked way. There’s no obligation for us to be correct. But trademarks serve a purpose and that purpose is to avoid consumer confusion through similarly or identically sounding names. It helps to make sure we don’t buy an inferior knock-off when we’re looking for a product with a reliability we’ve come to expect.
…which included the sentiment that the thing you’re bitching about is not much of an issue.
It’s you.
Normal people: Able to deal with referring to generic products with brand names and vice versa.
Moron in tdn’s story: Unable to cope with people using generic names instead of brand names.
Moron in the OP: Unable to cope with people using brand names instead of generic names.
You’re just the other side of the moron coin.
I just wanna know if it’s Death Spikes[sub]TM[/sub] or just “sharpened metal rods that will kill”… 
“Moron coin”? Heh, okay. And your little spin-job was clumsy and pathetic. She wasn’t “unable to cope with people using generic names instead of brand names.” She was too ignorant to realize that there’s a difference between a brand name and a product’s generic title. I, on the other hand, understand the idea that all portable music players aren’t Walkmans, and such. That’s not a parallel sided “moron coin”, that’s an opposite sided “correctness coin”, and I’m on the correct side.
If by “correct,” you mean “uselessly pedantic,” then, yes. Congratulations. I support tdn’s assessment that this isn’t a problem unless one or more parties is brain-damaged (whether it’s the person incorrectly calling something “Jello” or the person who gets in a snit because of it). If being technically correct is more important to you than having a tolerable personality, more power to you.
When done, be sure to throw it in the dempsey dumpster.
Now that just pisses me off. I can understand writing Popsicle instead of Quiescently Frozen Confection, but how difficult is it to refer to shampoo as shampoo? :mad:
Or if that’s too many letters, how about ‘poo’? Unless you *actually buy * poo.