Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: WordPress Cap & Trade; ?

  1. #1
    zamoose's Avatar
    zamoose is offline Hello World
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    43

    Default WordPress Cap & Trade; ?

    So here's a thought: the marginal utility of the capital_p_dangit() was to enforce the proper word mark for WordPress, with some hand-waving being done about "enforcing trademark" issues.

    So, if we're concerned about this and about not allowing for dilution of the WP mark, why wasn't a decision made to append an ™ to all invocations of WordPress as well? If we're concerned about the mark itself, oughtn't that get enforced too?

  2. #2
    Ryan's Avatar
    Ryan is offline WordPress Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,801

    Default

    I don't think it's the registration of the trademark that was the concern. It was dilution of the trademark/brand which is unconnected to the issue of trademark registration.

  3. #3
    zamoose's Avatar
    zamoose is offline Hello World
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    43

    Default

    @Ryan:
    But that's my point. Every time I write WordPress, I'm using the trademark, so oughtn't there be an™ appended?

  4. #4
    chipbennett's Avatar
    chipbennett is offline WordPress Legend
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    1,997

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan View Post
    I don't think it's the registration of the trademark that was the concern. It was dilution of the trademark/brand which is unconnected to the issue of trademark registration.
    A lower-case "p" in "WordPress" does not, in a legal sense, dilute the trademark. As an argument for the filter's inclusion in WordPress core, protection against trademark dilution is utterly specious.

    (If the inclusion of the filter in WordPress core were genuinely borne out of a desire to protect the trademark against dilution, I find it extremely difficult to understand why hundreds of URLs - that actually dilute the WordPress trademark - have been allowed to remain.)

    In reality, this filter exists in WordPress core for no other reason than to scratch a pedantic itch of Matt Mullenweg. Period.
    WP TurnKey - Turn-Key WordPress installation and maintenance services
    WordPress user since 2005 | @chip_bennett | chipbennett.net | cbnet Plugins

  5. #5
    Ryan's Avatar
    Ryan is offline WordPress Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,801

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zamoose View Post
    @Ryan:
    But that's my point. Every time I write WordPress, I'm using the trademark, so oughtn't there be an™ appended?
    How would adding an ™ help WordPress?

    Capitalising the P at least helps keep the trademark in use rather than having some other (albeit darned similar) word used instead. There's some logic there, they just have a slightly flawed approach of forcing people to do it.

    I'm not a fan of the capital_p_dangit() function by any means, but I think adding ™ is even worse. Very few people would want to intentionally add ™ to the name, so why would we want it added automatically?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •