Talk:Trademark dilution

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's silly that the dilution page refers to trademark dilution and not chemical dilution. If someone asked you to imagine dilution, your first thought would not involve trademarks.

LegCircus 05:09, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Moved to Trademark dilution per above comment (with which I agree).Bryan 15:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Shouldn't there be something about Google's recent fuss about "Google" being included as a verb in the dictionary, and the ad they placed. (I'm not really familiar with the story, or I'd do it). Jeremymiles 13:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Valid point. Wait until the Cisco v. Apple action (iPhone)comes down the line (assuming there's no agreement). The lower-case "i" Apple uses could be a blessing or a handicap. Ttlr113 04:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] iPods

So when I'm listening to my mp3 player and my mother tells me to put my iPod away (which I don't own an iPod)... Is that an example of trademark dilution?

Yes. This isn't the best place to ask that, however. Try the Reference Desk — trlkly 10:07, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

No, that's the public using a trademark as a generic term; "iPod" to mean all portable mp3 players just as "elevator" now means all verticle building lifts rather than just those manufactured by the Otis Company. If the other mp3 manufacturer itself called its product an iPod, that would be simple trademark infringement. If iPod were a sufficiently famous mark to qualify for dilution protection and a clothier came out with a line of iPod t-shirts, that would constitute dilution protection. Dilution only applies where the products are not actually in competition. Postdlf (talk) 19:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)