[Foundation-l] Wikipedia trademark being used incorrectly

Thu Nov 18 18:37:55 UTC 2004

Hi y'all,

I looked up the older trademark discussion at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Fromwikipedia#Wikipedia_Trademar
k, and it seems that I might have a different perspective from what I've
read so far. I have three general comments:

1. I think the Foundation should indeed officially register the "Wikipedia"
trademark (I was surprised to learn--correct me if I'm mistaken--that this
wasn't done ages ago), so that it can easily defend any cases that might
have to go to court.

2. Once the trademark is registered, I really don't understand why "we have
to protect our trademarks". I've always thought it was a good thing for a
company when its registered trademark becomes a household commodity to the
extent that it becomes synonymous with the generic item. For example, when I
used to live in the southern USA, people could go to a restaurant and order
a Coke. Then the waiter might literally ask, "What kind? Do you want a
Pepsi, a 7-Up, Dr. Pepper, or Coca-Cola?" Another example, though no longer
quite so prevalent, is that for a long time an "IBM PC" included a computer
manufactured by Dell, Compaq, or HP, as well as those made by IBM. A
"Kleenex" includes store-brand tissues for wiping your nose, "Cutex" means
any brand of nail polish, and "Vaseline" means petroleum jelly. In all these
cases, I think the genericness helps these brands to stand out as the de
facto standard. In fact, for a while IBM advertised its products with the
line, "Don't just get IBM-compatible, get IBM".

The only threat I do see is when competitors make a product that is just as
good for a better or comparable price, as in the case of 3M defending its
trademark on "Post-It Notes". Of course, in that case, then why pay more for
the real "Post-Its" when you can get another company's "Post-Its" for less
money, that work just as well? While that is a legitimate businesses threat,
I would hardly think that there is any such risk in Wikipedia's case--though
pursuing violators of the trademark seems to imply that this is the case.

My point is that I find it hard to understand what the problem is if people
begin to use "Wikipedia" to mean any generic wiki-based encyclopedia. I
think Wikipedia is popular enough that people would always come back to "the
real Wikipedia" eventually. I think that the Wikipedia name being used in
this way *helps* it in the long run, not harms it. Of course, I might be
totally missing something here that is obvious to everyone else, so I'd
appreciate people's comments.

3. Related to my previous point, I also think that the (TM) superscript is
*semantically* ugly, if not aesthetically so, because of the corporate image
it gives--so very un-free like. And I don't think chasing down violations of
the trademark helps Wikipedia's image. I don't think it's necessary, if the
Foundation has a legal registration in its pocket to pull out when it might
really become necessary.

Salut,
Chitu Okoli
(User:cokoli)

--===============1430519822==
Content-Type: message/rfc822
MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Michael Snow <wikipedia at earthlink.net>
Precedence: list
Subject: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia trademark being used incorrectly
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:27:58 -0800
To: foundation-l at wikimedia.org
References: <20041114231206.58B831AC02D6 at mail.wikimedia.org>
In-Reply-To: <20041114231206.58B831AC02D6 at mail.wikimedia.org>
Reply-To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
Message-ID: <419C24CE.7060001 at earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message: 7

In an article on Slyck.com ( http://www.slyck.com/news.php?story=609 ), 
the author improperly refers to infoAnarchy as a "Wikipedia". The 
relevant excerpt reads:

> InfoAnarchy.org has been involved with the P2P community for a 
> considerable amount of time - about the same as Zeropaid and Slyck. 
> Like P2Pnet.net, InfoAnarchy.org contains an impressive amount of 
> original content written by owner Erik Möller. One of its major 
> accomplishments is an extensive Wikipedia 
> <http://www.infoanarchy.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page> containing a 
> wealth of P2P and file-sharing information. Members of the site 
> maintain the Wikipedia. All InfoAnarchy.org needs is more frequent 
> news updates to make this a leading P2P news site.

I've already sent an email to Slyck in a public relations capacity, so 
we don't need to flood them with more. However, I think it would be 
helpful if Erik would also contact them, since he runs infoAnarchy, to 
help make sure this kind of confusion doesn't get perpetuated. Because 
Wikipedia is easily the largest and most recognizable wiki, we need to 
be vigilant against people misusing the Wikipedia name if we intend to 
protect our trademarks.

--Michael Snow