3 ms·

What's inappropriate about saying a term that is in wide, generic usage is in the public domain?

by chc 12y ago

derefr 12y ago
I would say that it's not in wide, generic usage, but rather in wide, implicitly-specific usage. That is, "generic usage" refers to things like people using "a kleenex" to refer to any facial tissue or "a xerox" to refer to any mimeograph. However, when people say "JavaScript", they always mean the exact same JavaScript: the one Oracle owns. (It could be argued that they mean ECMAscript—but that's a bit like saying that people who say "pass me a coke" when what they have available are cans of no-name generic cola (with trade-dress explicitly reminiscent of Coca-Cola's, no less) are actually thinking they want any generic cola, rather than that they want a Coca-Cola and that the can you have to offer is merely an adequate stand-in.
- throwaway0010 12y ago
  The coke bit has regional variance. In the entire southern US "coke" is a fully generic term for all carbonated beverages: http://laughingsquid.com/soda-pop-or-coke-maps-of-regional-dialect-variation-in-the-united-states/ http://laughingsquid.com/soda-pop-or-coke-maps-of-regional-d... Wikipedia lists "Coke" among marks that, while still protected, are often used generically: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericized_trademarks#List_of_protected_trademarks_frequently_used_as_generic_terms http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericized... I think many marks on that list, including coke, could very well lose their status if someone were to bother to fight the legal battle.
Alupis 12y ago
"Public Domain" has a very specific legal meaning -- of which does not apply to this situation.
bjt 12y ago
It's technically correct but not idiomatic. Technically correct because by the definition that Wikipedia gives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain), non-enforcement of a trademark could lead to forfeit of the rights on that trademark, and that is one of the options mentioned in the definition. But not idiomatic because the term is much more commonly used in copyright, rather than trademark, where it has a very specific legal meaning. A copyrighted work enters the public domain when the copyright expires (or in old cases, if the owner failed to renew the copyright).

What's inappropriate about saying a term that is in wide, generic usage is in the public domain?

by chc 12y ago

What's inappropriate about saying a term that is in wide, generic usage is in the public domain?

I would say that it's not in wide, generic usage, but rather in wide, implicitly-specific usage. That is, "generic usage" refers to things like people using "a kleenex" to refer to any facial tissue or "a xerox" to refer to any mimeograph. However, when people say "JavaScript", they always mean the exact same JavaScript: the one Oracle owns. (It could be argued that they mean ECMAscript—but that's a bit like saying that people who say "pass me a coke" when what they have available are cans of no-name generic cola (with trade-dress explicitly reminiscent of Coca-Cola's, no less) are actually thinking they want any generic cola, rather than that they want a Coca-Cola and that the can you have to offer is merely an adequate stand-in.

throwaway0010 12y ago
The coke bit has regional variance. In the entire southern US "coke" is a fully generic term for all carbonated beverages: http://laughingsquid.com/soda-pop-or-coke-maps-of-regional-dialect-variation-in-the-united-states/ http://laughingsquid.com/soda-pop-or-coke-maps-of-regional-d... Wikipedia lists "Coke" among marks that, while still protected, are often used generically: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericized_trademarks#List_of_protected_trademarks_frequently_used_as_generic_terms http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericized... I think many marks on that list, including coke, could very well lose their status if someone were to bother to fight the legal battle.

Alupis 12y ago

"Public Domain" has a very specific legal meaning -- of which does not apply to this situation.

bjt 12y ago

It's technically correct but not idiomatic. Technically correct because by the definition that Wikipedia gives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain), non-enforcement of a trademark could lead to forfeit of the rights on that trademark, and that is one of the options mentioned in the definition. But not idiomatic because the term is much more commonly used in copyright, rather than trademark, where it has a very specific legal meaning. A copyrighted work enters the public domain when the copyright expires (or in old cases, if the owner failed to renew the copyright).