Adobe desperately afraid of Photoshoppers
Posted by Matthew on Monday January 12, 2004 @01:01PM
from the patently-absurd dept.
matthew writes: Adobe® Systems, Inc., is desperately afraid of a diverse group of people who call themselves Photoshoppers—those who say that they photoshop images rather than using Adobe® Photoshop® to manipulate images.
Why? Because by using the name of Adobe’s® Premier® Photoshop® software as anything other than a proper adjective may tend to dilute the strength of Photoshop®’s trademark.
“Look what happened to SPAM®.” Says Adobe General Counsel Harmonious “Harm” Harper. “They had a strong trademark—an invented word, with a single meaning, that was well protected. Then along came unsolicited commercial e-mail. You can’t wipe your ass with the value of that trademark now. It happened to Jello®, Band-aid®, Xerox®, Kleenex®–a lot of strong American brands. It’s not going to happen to Photoshop®.”
Some would say that being subsumed into the vernacular is the ultimate sign of trademark success. Just for fun, we googled “Slashnotted” and came up with two hits—certainly a harbinger of fame for this site.
Adobe is desperately afraid that the words it appropriated from English to describe its products will be appropriated by English to describe its products. Do your part to help this corporation retain the strength of their trademark rights by modifying the way you speak and think to fit their needs.
Adobe®, Premier®, and Photoshop® are registered trademarks of Adobe Systems, Inc.
Subject:The link is like…
…ten times funnier than the story. They can't be serious.
Comment by FA — January 12, 2004 @ 1:21 pm
Subject:Absurd Trademarks
I wonder if they've patented there trademark rules….
Comment by HoqpoH — January 12, 2004 @ 2:41 pm
Subject:Re: The link is like…
Yeah, after I wrote this I realized that it wasn't funny, it was just, well, actual reporting. Sorry. I won't let it happen again.
Comment by matthew — January 12, 2004 @ 7:08 pm
Subject:Re: The link is like…
But the link is great!
Sometimes, the news is its own satire.
Comment by Tyson — January 13, 2004 @ 10:17 am
Subject:No Subject Given
This reminds me of the time back in the 80's when we bought a set of Legos for my sister and it came with a paper giving a stern lecture about how you were supposed to refer to them. “Legos” wrong, “Lego(tm) Brand Bricks” right.
If Adobe had any sense they'd jump on the bandwagon and advertise with slogans like “I'm a Photoshopper” or “Photoshop this”. And verbing the word themselves would even give them some protection from trademark dilution…
Comment by Michael — January 13, 2004 @ 11:45 pm
Subject:Re: Mr Reg Trademark
This is very serious! Sony no longer 'owns' the word walkman because of its generic public usage interstingly (or whatever the opposite of that is) Xerox(tm) do not have that problem because if they become aware of anybody doing any xeroxing on a non-Xerox(tm) brand machine they send them a letter advising them of the correct usage. If only more companies would make the effort to do the same…
Comment by Mane — January 17, 2004 @ 8:41 am
Subject:Re: Mr Reg Trademark
I feel my heart bleeding for Sony's loss. If only more companies would threaten me for the way I choose to speak. I'm so much in favor of corporate rights over my own.
Comment by Matthew — January 18, 2004 @ 10:38 am
Subject:Re: Mr Reg Trademark
Wow, I never realized that Sony was suffering just as much as Britney Spears suffers when people download music online.
Comment by Michael — January 20, 2004 @ 5:55 am
Subject:Re: Mr Reg Trademark
No this is not 'very serious'. It's only serious for corporations. And last I checked it wasn't illegal for me to refer to just *any* photocopy as a Xerox.
Why? BECAUSE WE LIVE IN AMERICA!!!
Comment by Lavahead — January 22, 2004 @ 1:57 am
Subject:Re: Mr Reg Trademark
Actually, I live in Australia, but I still reserve the right to call antipodean copiers “Xeroxes” if I really want to
Comment by peter — January 26, 2004 @ 7:52 pm