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.
Subject:Re: (r) vs. (TM) From:"Linda K. Sherman" <linsherm -at- GTE -dot- NET> Date:Wed, 12 Aug 1998 20:34:06 -0400
Geoff Hart (by way of "Eric J. Ray" ) wrote:
>
> ...if you can't confirm which is the correct
> symbol, and that should be a very rare situation indeed, use (R)
You're actually better off not to use any mark at all when you're not
sure. It is never necessary to use a trademark symbol or to even
acknowledge a trademark--the trademark is still protected by law
regardless of what you do. However, not all brand names are trademarked,
and so using (R) or (TM) would always be wrong in those cases, as is
using (R) when it's really a (TM), whereas omitting (R) or (TM) from a
trademarked symbol is never wrong.
Also, it is the responsibility of the owning company to protect and
publicize their trademark. If they fail to do so in a way that makes it
relatively easy to find out if the name is protected, why should you go
to any trouble and expense to find out? Are they paying you part of
their profits?
The practice of putting lines like "Pentium is a registered trademark of
Intel Corp." etc. in documents and advertisements is to make absolutely
sure that if any of the three people on the planet who still haven't
heard of Pentiums and Intel should happen to read your document, they
won't think that your company makes the Pentium. It's also a courtesy
thing--you'd like Intel to show the same respect for your trademarks.
But there's no legal obligation to do any of this.
> The only case where you might want to
> repeat the symbol is if it might appear that you're claiming the
> product as your own
I disagree very much with this. If you are using the trademark in a way
that makes it appear that it is your own, adding the symbol will not
change the way you're using it and will not give you any defense in
court ("b...b...but your honor, we put the little R thingy after it!").
No sir, you've got to avoid the misleading usage altogether, which
should be no problem at all for the geniuses on this list, right? <g>
> or trying to turn it into a generic term;
If you're using the term correctly, you shouldn't have to worry about
this. Trademarks are essentially adjectives--correctly, it's the
"Pentium processor" and not "the Pentium", "Kleenex tissue" and not "a
Kleenex", "Ford cars" and not "Fords", etc. If you remember this rule
then you won't have to worry about the terms being mistaken as generics.
In any case, there's nothing their lawyers could do if you did use the
term generically, at least not in the U.S. That would be prior
restraint without cause, as the legal beagles would say, and that's a
no-no under the First Amendment.
