You also lose the trademarks you don’t defend. If Nintendo was found to knowingly not pursue those that infringe in their trademarks then they a court could allow someone else to use that trademark.
Nintendo game out hot at the start when people were referring to other consoles as “Nintendos” even though they weren’t NES’ or SNES’. Theres plenty of precedence already then why they had to stop that immediately.
They weren’t people or organisations they could sue.
If Sony said the new Nintendo system playstation, Nintendo would lose trademark rights over this. Because a large business like valve is involved they can sue and are compelled to sue to retain their trademark.
The emulator that recently got taken down was because an organisation was developing and distributing it. Individuals that copy and share the source code themselves won’t get any threats from Nintendo because they don’t need to find and sue them. Nintendo had to sue these other businesses, to retain their trademark.
The problem stems from the subtle ways in which language develops. It’s instinctive for us to pluralise product names in everyday conversation (Oreos, Jet Skis) or turn them into verbs (to photoshop, to tarmac). But by doing so we begin to erode the trademark. Companies can, from the outset, encourage us to use an alternative generic name; sometimes this works (Nintendo pushing the term “games console”), sometimes it almost works (Xerox’s fondness for the term “photocopying”), and sometimes it fails miserably (who has ever referred to the once-trademarked trampoline as a “rebound tumbler”?)
Nintendo had to start calling their stuff “game consoles” so their name wouldn’t be genericized to refer to all consoles. Its not always about sueing others. Theres lots of avenues they need to protect and they knew they needed to defend it from the start.
You also lose the trademarks you don’t defend. If Nintendo was found to knowingly not pursue those that infringe in their trademarks then they a court could allow someone else to use that trademark.
Nintendo game out hot at the start when people were referring to other consoles as “Nintendos” even though they weren’t NES’ or SNES’. Theres plenty of precedence already then why they had to stop that immediately.
They weren’t people or organisations they could sue.
If Sony said the new Nintendo system playstation, Nintendo would lose trademark rights over this. Because a large business like valve is involved they can sue and are compelled to sue to retain their trademark.
The emulator that recently got taken down was because an organisation was developing and distributing it. Individuals that copy and share the source code themselves won’t get any threats from Nintendo because they don’t need to find and sue them. Nintendo had to sue these other businesses, to retain their trademark.
Nintendo had to start calling their stuff “game consoles” so their name wouldn’t be genericized to refer to all consoles. Its not always about sueing others. Theres lots of avenues they need to protect and they knew they needed to defend it from the start.
huh is there a list somewhere by any chance of stuff that lost its trademark because it became too widely used? like trampoline, that’s a surprise
Wiki has one
You’re right, sometimes it’s also about straight-up begging the public through a catchy musical number to not use your brand name generically
Let’s not pretend that the law somehow requires Nintendo to threaten and bully Garry’s Mod, because that just isn’t the case.