Talk:Trademark distinctiveness/Archives/2013
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Attribution
Material in this article was originally divided out of the main Trademark article; edit history can be found there. bd2412 T 18:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Pullum reference
I like the way that the Pullum reference [1] is used to support
- The proper use of a trademark means using the mark as an adjective, not as a noun or a verb
where it actually says just the opposite: trademarks are sometimes used as verbs, never as adjectives, and almost always as nouns (split between head nouns and attributive nouns).
CRGreathouse (t | c) 13:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
"Genericide"
From the "Maintaining Distinctiveness" section: "...are both trademarks which are at risk of succumbing to genericide in certain countries..." I feel that 'genericide' is the wrong word here. In general, words that end in -cide mean the killing of the subject described in the prefix. So, patricide means killing of the father, infanticide means killing of infants, etc. Genericide would be something like the destruction of genericity, then, which doesn't make sense. I'm not aware that there's a general form for words describing death "by" something. In general, English tends to use specific words, like "poisoning" or "asphyxiation." I'm going to change this word. Not a huge edit, but I am conscious of the fact that I may be making a huge leap/error here, so I wanted a record of my thought process. 76.9.199.178 (talk) 20:27, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
US Focus of article
Seems like a really easy way to avoid having to disclaim the article as being too specific to one country is to just call this out as "Trademark distinctiveness in the United States." 24.159.199.114 (talk) 19:42, 2 July 2013 (UTC)