Is it because it reaches a critical mass of usage, so the people get to take it back?
It’s not my point but that’s literally how it legally works in the US. That’s why Velcro insists on calling their product “Velcro brand hook and loop fastener”
That’s actually pretty common too. Just off the top of my head: Cleanex, Xerox and Nintendo have all had to do similar things to protect their trademark.
They really started padding it towards the end to get to 50 but the first half or so of this listicle has a lot of good examples, quite a few that I didn’t know
And those are brand names. This is just a generic promotion of a common product on a particular weekday. Which day is obvious because it alliterates with the food. Surely most people were surprised to hear anyone claimed to own the concept. Has it not been occasionally present at every cafeteria throughout their life?
TIL about trademark erosion. Also, thanks for a proper response.
Trademark erosion, or genericization, is a special case of antonomasia related to trademarks. It happens when a trademark becomes so common that it starts being used as a common name and the original company has failed to prevent such use.
I guess Nintendo fought it successfully by getting the world to call the thing a “game console” rather than calling it a Nintendo. Hoover failed to defend the verb “Hoover” and lost it.
In this case, it just seems like the win is for Taco Bell and their efforts to gain, use and profit from the term. And that makes it feel a little gross and brutish. They could prove me wrong though.
Yeah, “super bowl” also shouldn’t be trade marked, It’s far too generalized to be reasonable. Zoidberg should be as that is a character in a show and should be claimed by the creators with exception given to people whom have that name in real life referring to their own products.
I’m lovin’ it also shouldn’t be trademarked. It’s literally just an expression of joy.
I don’t get why this has to be a difficult concept. McDonald’s didn’t create anything new. The NFL didn’t fabricate the concept of extraordinary dishware. It is absolutely nonsense that anyone with enough money and influence can just choose a couple pre-existing words out of the English language and claim ownership.
They should have never been granted the trademark based on prioriry. They did not coin or use the term first. They are not fighting because they know they wouldn’t survive a challenge which is why they just bullied small shops who themselves didn’t have the pockets to defend themselves.
I don’t think that’s what happened? Based on this article and another one I read, it seems that now the Taco Tuesday trademark is relinquished meaning anyone can use it. I’m guessing taco bell would rather everyone be able to use it including them rather than it being locked down by someone who’s not them.
According to The Strange History of Taco Tuesday, the promotional phrase was started in 1982 by a chain called Taco John’s based out of Cheyenne, Wyoming. In fact, Taco John’s placed a registered trademark on the phrase in 1989 to attach it to their brand. They filed a lawsuit against another restaurant chain after seeing that it was used, but the lawsuit resulted in bad press, so they have stopped enforcing their trademark. They still use it as their brand’s signature, and rightfully so!
Fuck Taco Bell. Taco Bell only won because Taco John’s didn’t have deep enough pockets to defend the trademarked term they legally had.
Look, fuck the gross Yum Brands mega conglomerate, but the idea that someone could own the trademark to “Taco Tuesday” is fucking ridiculous.
Welcome to the US, where the rules are made up and the goalposts are set by the deepest pockets.
What makes it fucking stupid? Is it because it reaches a critical mass of usage, so the people get to take it back? Something else?
As an aside, I have a new product idea: Zoidberg’s Super Bowl of Cereal: I’m Lovin’ It!
It’s not my point but that’s literally how it legally works in the US. That’s why Velcro insists on calling their product “Velcro brand hook and loop fastener”
That’s actually pretty common too. Just off the top of my head: Cleanex, Xerox and Nintendo have all had to do similar things to protect their trademark.
Escalator was once a brand name.
They really started padding it towards the end to get to 50 but the first half or so of this listicle has a lot of good examples, quite a few that I didn’t know
https://www.impactplus.com/blog/50-everyday-words-that-started-as-brands-and-trademarks
And those are brand names. This is just a generic promotion of a common product on a particular weekday. Which day is obvious because it alliterates with the food. Surely most people were surprised to hear anyone claimed to own the concept. Has it not been occasionally present at every cafeteria throughout their life?
TIL about trademark erosion. Also, thanks for a proper response.
I guess Nintendo fought it successfully by getting the world to call the thing a “game console” rather than calling it a Nintendo. Hoover failed to defend the verb “Hoover” and lost it.
In this case, it just seems like the win is for Taco Bell and their efforts to gain, use and profit from the term. And that makes it feel a little gross and brutish. They could prove me wrong though.
Sometimes a soulless megacorp is the one in the right.
https://clickhole.com/heartbreaking-the-worst-person-you-know-just-made-a-gr-1825121606/
It’s a food item and a day of the week.
Yeah, “super bowl” also shouldn’t be trade marked, It’s far too generalized to be reasonable. Zoidberg should be as that is a character in a show and should be claimed by the creators with exception given to people whom have that name in real life referring to their own products.
I’m lovin’ it also shouldn’t be trademarked. It’s literally just an expression of joy.
I don’t get why this has to be a difficult concept. McDonald’s didn’t create anything new. The NFL didn’t fabricate the concept of extraordinary dishware. It is absolutely nonsense that anyone with enough money and influence can just choose a couple pre-existing words out of the English language and claim ownership.
They should have never been granted the trademark based on prioriry. They did not coin or use the term first. They are not fighting because they know they wouldn’t survive a challenge which is why they just bullied small shops who themselves didn’t have the pockets to defend themselves.
I don’t think that’s what happened? Based on this article and another one I read, it seems that now the Taco Tuesday trademark is relinquished meaning anyone can use it. I’m guessing taco bell would rather everyone be able to use it including them rather than it being locked down by someone who’s not them.
Indeed that was the case:
https://bennystacos.com/taco-tuesday-legendary-tradition/
So Taco John gave up the trademark and now any restaurant can advertise “Taco Tuesday” specials.
deleted by creator
My understanding is Taco John’s used to prevent smaller shops from using it
Do you really want Taco John’s to hold the usage rights to ‘taco Tuesday’?