TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
RE: Xerox & Kleenex (was legality of web links to articles?)
Subject:RE: Xerox & Kleenex (was legality of web links to articles?) From:"Andrew Dugas" <dugas -at- intalio -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Thu, 14 Feb 2002 09:31:39 -0800
I think you missed his point, which is that the manufacturers, as in the
case of Kleenex and Xerox, benefit from the association because they protect
the trademark.
I don't think he suggested that this was in any way bad. Rather, it is the
very reason to protect the trademark so aggressively.
If anyone can manufacture and market a zipper, aspirin, or escalator, how
does the original manufacturer benefit? If anything, the fact that we no
longer associate those words with specific brand products indicates that the
original manufacturer, if they even still exist, has lost untold revenues
from diminished market share.
When you buy Kleenex, whoever makes and markets Kleenex benefits from the
sale.
But when you buy a zipper... How many dozens of companies make zippers?
(rhetorical question)
-----Original Message-----
From: bounce-techwr-l-88324 -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
[mailto:bounce-techwr-l-88324 -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com]On Behalf Of
kcronin -at- daleen -dot- com
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 7:56 AM
To: TECHWR-L
Subject: Re: Xerox & Kleenex (was legality of web links to articles?)
Mark notes:
> But in fact, the names
> Xerox and Kleenex are not in the public domain because
> their respective companies do aggressively protect
> their trademarks.
Mark raises some good points, but I have to wonder: just how bad IS it to
have your company's name indelibly associated with a universally-used
product or process?
I can think of few companies that probably wouldn't mind if it became
common to ask for a Puffs to dry your tears as you apply a Curad to the
nasty papercut you sustained while making a Pitney Bowes in the printer
room.....
- Keith Cronin
_____________________________________
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Collect Royalties, Not Rejection Letters! Tell us your rejection story when you
submit your manuscript to iUniverse Nov. 6 -Dec. 15 and get five free copies of
your book. What are you waiting for? http://www.iuniverse.com/media/techwr
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.