http://gigaom.com/mobile/intel-joins-the-dell-netbook-trademark-party/ Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:57:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ http://gigaom.com/mobile/intel-joins-the-dell-netbook-trademark-party/#comment-413793 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:14:15 +0000 http://jkontherun.com/?p=30497#comment-413793 I would be inclined to agree with you, except this seems to be a unique case. In the past, terms became generic through popularity before other companies started using them. In this case, the name became generic after Intel made it popular. Thus far, I haven’t found a precedent for this, so it seems quite unusual to me.

]]> http://gigaom.com/mobile/intel-joins-the-dell-netbook-trademark-party/#comment-413792 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 15:39:34 +0000 http://jkontherun.com/?p=30497#comment-413792 @Sumocat — it may be disgusting, but it’s also business as usual. Not defending Intel here (and I don’t see a need for the term netbook anyway), but it’s really not shocking to see them do what they do.

]]> http://gigaom.com/mobile/intel-joins-the-dell-netbook-trademark-party/#comment-413791 Wed, 25 Feb 2009 15:07:23 +0000 http://jkontherun.com/?p=30497#comment-413791 You know what else appears to be good business? Genericizing someone else’s registered trademark. It is insulting that Intel would make the “genericness” argument without admitting that they genericized the term. Do they think we’ve all been asleep the past year since they (re)introduced the “netbook” category? And now they’re suing the trademark holder because they’re defending their trademark? It’s disgusting.

]]>