<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Works that would be in the public domain today -- if America hadn&#039;t extended copyright terms in&#160;1976</title>
	<atom:link href="http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html</link>
	<description>Brain candy for Happy Mutants</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 18:27:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: RobertG</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html#comment-1619024</link>
		<dc:creator>RobertG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2013 18:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boingboing.net/?p=203407#comment-1619024</guid>
		<description>So what if these titles had gone public? What am I missing?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So what if these titles had gone public? What am I missing?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Incipient Madness</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html#comment-1618802</link>
		<dc:creator>Incipient Madness</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2013 05:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boingboing.net/?p=203407#comment-1618802</guid>
		<description>I think we should go back to the Edict of Anne, the English copyright law the original US laws were based on. You get 28 years. That&#039;s a long time. If you&#039;re gonna be broke after that 28 years is up, your lazy ass should have done something else in that 28 years you had.  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think we should go back to the Edict of Anne, the English copyright law the original US laws were based on. You get 28 years. That&#8217;s a long time. If you&#8217;re gonna be broke after that 28 years is up, your lazy ass should have done something else in that 28 years you had.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Smith</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html#comment-1618721</link>
		<dc:creator>John Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2013 00:55:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boingboing.net/?p=203407#comment-1618721</guid>
		<description>Is God still collecting royalties the Ten Commandments?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is God still collecting royalties the Ten Commandments?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ldobe</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html#comment-1618633</link>
		<dc:creator>ldobe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 20:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boingboing.net/?p=203407#comment-1618633</guid>
		<description>Yeah, but can&#039;t that also count as brand dilution in a sense? If you license your trademark to every Tom, Dick and Harry, doesn&#039;t your mark stand a chance of becoming too ubiquitous as well?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, but can&#8217;t that also count as brand dilution in a sense? If you license your trademark to every Tom, Dick and Harry, doesn&#8217;t your mark stand a chance of becoming too ubiquitous as well?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fuzzyfuzzyfungus</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html#comment-1618599</link>
		<dc:creator>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 20:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boingboing.net/?p=203407#comment-1618599</guid>
		<description>I suspect that it would be deeply impractical; but it would be rather interesting if trademarks that were established to connote certain things were &lt;em&gt;required&lt;/em&gt; to continue to do so, even against the owner&#039;s wishes...

At present, the customer-protection aspect prevents any non-owner from using the trademark in a deceptive manner; but it doesn&#039;t place any restrictions on the owner(aside from their desire not to sully it, and any incidentally applicable consumer protection/warranty regulations).

Imagine, hypothetically, if it were the case that establishing &#039;Pyrex(r) brand thermal-shock resistant borosilicate glassware&#039; made attaching the &#039;Pyrex&#039; name to some other article, even if you were the owner of the trademark, a deceptive act...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suspect that it would be deeply impractical; but it would be rather interesting if trademarks that were established to connote certain things were <em>required</em> to continue to do so, even against the owner&#8217;s wishes&#8230;</p>
<p>At present, the customer-protection aspect prevents any non-owner from using the trademark in a deceptive manner; but it doesn&#8217;t place any restrictions on the owner(aside from their desire not to sully it, and any incidentally applicable consumer protection/warranty regulations).</p>
<p>Imagine, hypothetically, if it were the case that establishing &#8216;Pyrex(r) brand thermal-shock resistant borosilicate glassware&#8217; made attaching the &#8216;Pyrex&#8217; name to some other article, even if you were the owner of the trademark, a deceptive act&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: beenlost</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html#comment-1618589</link>
		<dc:creator>beenlost</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 19:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boingboing.net/?p=203407#comment-1618589</guid>
		<description>Agreed. But there is still a problem with trademarks - they can be bought and applied to inferior products. Read a bunch about Pyrex® in particular and several other companies that were sold and then the quality went to hell - usually because it was outsourced a short time later.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agreed. But there is still a problem with trademarks &#8211; they can be bought and applied to inferior products. Read a bunch about Pyrex® in particular and several other companies that were sold and then the quality went to hell &#8211; usually because it was outsourced a short time later.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ldobe</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html#comment-1618581</link>
		<dc:creator>ldobe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 19:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boingboing.net/?p=203407#comment-1618581</guid>
		<description>True, what I was getting at is the fact that trademark and copyright are different. If you&#039;re punctual and a branding a-hole who sues whenever your trademark is misused, you can keep your trademark indefinitely long, and that really isn&#039;t a bad thing as long as trademark remains a consumer protection tool.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>True, what I was getting at is the fact that trademark and copyright are different. If you&#8217;re punctual and a branding a-hole who sues whenever your trademark is misused, you can keep your trademark indefinitely long, and that really isn&#8217;t a bad thing as long as trademark remains a consumer protection tool.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: beenlost</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html#comment-1618576</link>
		<dc:creator>beenlost</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 19:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boingboing.net/?p=203407#comment-1618576</guid>
		<description>Renewing your trademark registration (also called a &quot;Section 9&quot; filing) is required by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for trademark owners to maintain their trademark rights. If your trademark has been registered for 9 years, it&#039;s time to file a renewal—you have one year following that 9-year anniversary to renew. Following your first renewal, renewals are required every 10 years. All renewals, should be filed as Combined Section 8 Declaration/Section 9 Renewal. If no renewal is filed, registration will be lost.Trademark&#039;s that are not renewed become public domain. I&#039;ve also heard of cases where trademark&#039;s have been lost or technically lost due the the owner not protecting it or through the trademark becoming so ubiquitous that it can&#039;t be protected - Thermos and Kleenex have had run in&#039;s this way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Renewing your trademark registration (also called a &#8220;Section 9&#8243; filing) is required by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for trademark owners to maintain their trademark rights. If your trademark has been registered for 9 years, it&#8217;s time to file a renewal—you have one year following that 9-year anniversary to renew. Following your first renewal, renewals are required every 10 years. All renewals, should be filed as Combined Section 8 Declaration/Section 9 Renewal. If no renewal is filed, registration will be lost.Trademark&#8217;s that are not renewed become public domain. I&#8217;ve also heard of cases where trademark&#8217;s have been lost or technically lost due the the owner not protecting it or through the trademark becoming so ubiquitous that it can&#8217;t be protected &#8211; Thermos and Kleenex have had run in&#8217;s this way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: voiceinthedistance</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html#comment-1618561</link>
		<dc:creator>voiceinthedistance</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 19:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boingboing.net/?p=203407#comment-1618561</guid>
		<description>I smell a rat.  Thanks, MM.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I smell a rat.  Thanks, MM.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ldobe</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html#comment-1618559</link>
		<dc:creator>ldobe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 19:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boingboing.net/?p=203407#comment-1618559</guid>
		<description>Velcro(r) is a trademark. It lasts forever as long as it&#039;s used to refer to a specific brand of hook-and-loop fastener. It has absolutely nothing to do with copyright and the public domain.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Velcro(r) is a trademark. It lasts forever as long as it&#8217;s used to refer to a specific brand of hook-and-loop fastener. It has absolutely nothing to do with copyright and the public domain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: beenlost</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html#comment-1618558</link>
		<dc:creator>beenlost</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 19:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boingboing.net/?p=203407#comment-1618558</guid>
		<description>Odd isn&#039;t it that something like Velcro®&#039;s patent has run out, but its name is protected for quite a while yet.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Odd isn&#8217;t it that something like Velcro®&#8217;s patent has run out, but its name is protected for quite a while yet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fuzzyfuzzyfungus</title>
		<link>http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/works-that-would-be-in-the-pub.html#comment-1618554</link>
		<dc:creator>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2013 18:49:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boingboing.net/?p=203407#comment-1618554</guid>
		<description>Break out your Ouija boards, folks, there&#039;re a lot of dead content creators who I&#039;ve been assured by 100% trustworthy lobbyists are &lt;em&gt;mighty&lt;/em&gt; incentivized to produce new and exciting work thanks to their extended copyright terms. Somebody had better get ready to channel it for them...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Break out your Ouija boards, folks, there&#8217;re a lot of dead content creators who I&#8217;ve been assured by 100% trustworthy lobbyists are <em>mighty</em> incentivized to produce new and exciting work thanks to their extended copyright terms. Somebody had better get ready to channel it for them&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
