Psion Tries to Own the Word Netbook

[Chris Gohlke]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://jkontherun.com/2008/12/23/netbook-enthusiast-web-sites-getting-c-d-using-term-netbook/' target='_blank'>http://jkontherun.com/2008/12/23/ne...g-term-netbook/</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"This is very preliminary but we are hearing that some netbook enthusiast sites are getting &ldquo;cease &amp; desist&rdquo; letters from a firm in the UK ordering the sites to stop using the term &ldquo;netbook&rdquo;. The letters claim that the term netbook is trademarked by the firm that produced the Psion netBook in the early 2000&rsquo;s."</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/dht/auto/1230486461.usr10.jpg" style="border: 0;" /></p><p><em>Image Courtesy of MaximumPC</em></p><p>This definitely qualifies as stupid.&nbsp; I could ALMOST understand suing netbook makers for using the term if it is trademarked, but going after enthusiast sites for using the term is just completely stupid.&nbsp; I just did a quick look at the official sites for Dell and Asus and was easily able to find the term netbook being used.&nbsp; I did not find it on HP or Acer's site, but I didn't look very hard.&nbsp; Also, Amazon.com and Best Buy both use the term netbook as well.&nbsp; The fact that they are going after the little guys and not the deep pockets (who are better able to defend themselves) makes me think they know they have no case but are going for some early victories to help bolster a case against the big guys.&nbsp; I've got only one thing to say to that: netbook, netbook, netbook, netbook, netbook........</p>

[Hooch Tan]

Some more information has been posted on jkOnTheRun about this whole brouhaha.

http://jkontherun.com/2008/12/27/psions-netbook-trademark-defense-psion-responds/

From what I understand the term has been trademarked (though not used for several years) and they're specifically targeting sites that are drawing a direct profit from the term netbook. This does likely include the large companies like HP and Intel, though I don't know if we'll hear of those notices.

I do think that it is probably too late as the term has been pretty much genericized for quite some time now. Their window for protecting the term has closed.

[Jason Dunn]

Completely and totally pathetic. Psion failed in the marketplace - or failed to last rather, they did have some good products for their time - and now they think they can sue their way back into the scene. Rather than coming out with their own netbook, and using their position in the market to cleverly advertise it was "The Original Netbook" they decide they'll sue companies using the term.

90% of the laywers in this world should be rounded up and shot. :mad:

[Jason Dunn]

...I should add that no amounts of lawsuits by Psion will *ever* change the name. It's firmly established amongst the minds of the the tech world. Psion will have about as much of a chance of changing this as people did trying to change the term "podcast" to something more generic. Psion is going to fail, and they're going to look like idiots doing it. If they really cared about their trademark, they'd have made a big deal about it when this category started to emerge. Instead they chose to wait for the term to become tech mainsteam and now they unleash the laywers.

It might very well be that the people who started tossing around the term "netbook" had sub-conscious knowledge of the original Psion Netbook, but I even though I knew about that product when it was out, I had completely forgotten about it - it's a dead product. Psion should be flattered that the term they came up with for their product lives on, and move on with their business - which includes nothing like a netbook.

[igreen]

Actually, its not as pathetic as it sounds. Its just a little late. In order to keep their trademark from becoming part of the public domain they must defend it. Much the same as the coffee brand Sanka used to jump all over people for using the term Sanka to mean ANY decaf coffee. Does it mean that Psion is going to sue everyone? Even the little guy? No....it just means they have to show good faith effort to defend their trademark. If everyone on the planet started to call any MP3 player an iPod you could expect Apple to do the same. Its just the way trademarks work.

[Chris Gohlke]

Yes, but I don't recall seeing Kimberly-Clark suing a newspaper for referring to a facial tissue as a Kleenex.

I understand protecting a trademark, but again enthusiast websites are not the way to show due diligence. Suing those who are actually infringing and selling a product labeled with your trademark is.

[igreen]

I'd be very surprised to see Psion actually sue any enthusiast sites. Sending a letter is trivial versus the cost and effort required for Psion to send a letter. With a mere letter they can check off the "we tried to defend our trademark" box as far as the law is concerned.

[Jason Dunn]

Actually, its not as pathetic as it sounds. Its just a little late.

Right, but that's the fishy part - they waited until it became the industry standard name for it, then their lawyers got involved. If they were REALLY trying to protect their trademark, they'd have gotten busy within weeks of Intel using the name - or, hell, have already owned netbook.com. How can they be serious about protecting their trademark if they didn't own the .com version of their trademark?

If everyone on the planet started to call any MP3 player an iPod you could expect Apple to do the same. Its just the way trademarks work.

Actually, an argument could easily be made that Apple could lose their trademark on iPod because for the most part Joe Consumer calls every MP3 player an iPod - whenever people see my Zune they ask if it's an iPod. But if someone else dared to call their MP3 player an iPod, Apple would launch a hive of lawyers at them - and they'd do it immediately, they wouldn't wait more than a year.

I understand that this is how trademark law works, but my point is that by waiting as long as they did, Psion is making it sadly obvious that they're after a cash grab here - likely offering to license the term to Intel and anyone else that wants to use it. And that's the pathetic part in my opinion. :rolleyes:

[whydidnt]

My complaint is how trademark law protects a name like "netbook" even after the company has ceased production, sale, etc. of that product. Trademark law was created so companies would be protected from competitor's advertising their product as the trademarked product. At this point, Psion's netbook is no more, how can there be a trademark violation when the original Netbook is no longer a product?

This points once again to issues with current Trademark law and interpretation of the same. Not to mention short-sightedness on the part of Psion. If they want to become relevant again, the best way to make sure they fail is to tick off most the tech community.

[Pony99CA]

My complaint is how trademark law protects a name like "netbook" even after the company has ceased production, sale, etc. of that product. Trademark law was created so companies would be protected from competitor's advertising their product as the trademarked product. At this point, Psion's netbook is no more, how can there be a trademark violation when the original Netbook is no longer a product?
My understanding is that they still sell accessories for the product, so that could keep the trademark alive.

This points once again to issues with current Trademark law and interpretation of the same. Not to mention short-sightedness on the part of Psion. If they want to become relevant again, the best way to make sure they fail is to tick off most the tech community.
The tech community is getting upset over nothing. I read the original letter, and it seemed fairly polite, even giving three months to come up with a different name. And, if you read the follow-up, the only "community" sites they sent the letter to were those making money from the name (including serving ads containing the name).

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Yes, but I don't recall seeing Kimberly-Clark suing a newspaper for referring to a facial tissue as a Kleenex.
First, do you recall a newpaper actually doing that? I think most editors would probably catch that.

Second, just because you didn't read about Kimberly-Clark doing it doesn't mean it didn't happen, although they'd more likely send a polite notice instead.

If you watch TV, you might have noticed Johnson & Johnson Band-Aid ads that always say "Band-Aid brand bandages" to prevent trademark dilution. And I've seen TV talk show hosts say they've gotten letters when they used a trademarked name generically (they then usually make a joke out of it by saying "I'd like to a drive a porsche" -- with a lowercase "p").

I understand protecting a trademark, but again enthusiast websites are not the way to show due diligence. Suing those who are actually infringing and selling a product labeled with your trademark is.
Read the follow-up. Most of the letters sent out went to manufacturers and sellers using the term. And, as was pointed out, a cease-and-desist letter is not being sued.

Steve

[Pony99CA]

...I should add that no amounts of lawsuits by Psion will *ever* change the name. It's firmly established amongst the minds of the the tech world.
It's only been used for what, a year? I think Psion could change the dialog in three steps.


Sue a few manufacturers for trademark infringement. If the term isn't ruled generic (I don't know what the standard is to prove that), the manufacturers will have to come up with a new name.
Sue the sellers using the term. That will take the term out of commercial use.
Send cease-and-desist letters to the media still using the term. Once a new term is in use by the manufacturers and sellers, there's not much reason to still call it a NetBook anyway.

I think Psion may have jumped the gun a bit by going to step 3 so quickly, but remember that dilution probably occurs most often due to use by normal people, not the manufacturers and sellers of similar devices (they tend to get sued for infringement).

Or, as I've said elsewhere, maybe Psion is just seeking an accommodation like Cisco got when Apple infringed the iPhone trademark.

Steve