Comments on: Kleenex(tm) in aisle NSFW(tm)

Kleenex(tm) in aisle NSFW(tm)

F Mackenzie — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:33:58 -0800

--Drew Curtis (Fark) attempts to trademark "Not Safe For Work"

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:35:44 -0800

*rushes off to trademark LOL*

By: backseatpilot

backseatpilot — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:36:33 -0800

He should know better.

By: louie

louie — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:39:47 -0800

The kind folks at NSFW.com (who, AFAICT, have no connection to fark) will probably have some objection to that. :) But seriously... is he serious? or is this another fark stunt? Any link to discussion of this? The future IP lawyer in me is just dying to know.

By: weapons-grade pandemonium

weapons-grade pandemonium — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:43:10 -0800

I claim NAXT.

By: Poolio

Poolio — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:43:42 -0800

That's hot!

By: jsavimbi

jsavimbi — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:45:06 -0800

WTF, Drew?

By: loquacious

loquacious — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:50:25 -0800

FAIL

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:51:01 -0800

i just trademarked LOL - i am going to rule so much ...

By: Zonker

Zonker — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:51:19 -0800

Asshat™

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:51:57 -0800

damn you, crash_davis, damn you - now i'm stuck with something lousy like IMHO -

By: knave

knave — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:52:31 -0800

You're doing it wrong.

By: loquacious

loquacious — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:54:41 -0800

Less stupid: I predict a rush of people mining their logs as far back as they can for emoticon and acronym inventions. I can probably pull "prior art" for NSFW out of email logs from the early 90s. Which is to say: the nerd with the oldest files wins. Grep on!

By: DU

DU — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:55:19 -0800

I just patented the process of trademarking and I deny this guy a license.

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:56:25 -0800

frat asshats rule kollege = FARK

By: F Mackenzie

F Mackenzie — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:58:17 -0800

Please submit a list to this site of Internet acronyms for future trademark. I 'm AFK(tm) but will BBL(tm) as I'm currently ROLF(tm) on the beach while I think of my next MOTD(tm). For the record, IANAL(tm).

By: not_on_display

not_on_display — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:00:11 -0800

NSFW Brought to you by Carl's Jr.

By: humannaire

humannaire — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:04:06 -0800

BTW? It's mine.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:09:14 -0800

OFCOLJFCOAPS (oh for crying out loud, Jesus Fucking Christ on a pogo stick) I'm gonna get in on the ground floor.

By: vrakatar

vrakatar — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:11:59 -0800

mehts, as in the baseball team. Yankee fans will love it.

By: Smart Dalek

Smart Dalek — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:12:15 -0800

NSFW* 2007 Ecko Unlimited, a division of Mark Ecko Enterpsises

By: ZenMasterThis

ZenMasterThis — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:13:26 -0800

STFU^TM ST Francis University.

By: inconsequentialist

inconsequentialist — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:13:46 -0800

That's hot.

By: adamrice

adamrice — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:14:53 -0800

No Sale, Fark Wanker.

By: cjorgensen

cjorgensen — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:14:57 -0800

Freedom of Expression

By: vrakatar

vrakatar — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:16:19 -0800

Meeht the Mehts! Buy some Mehrchendise!

By: caddis

caddis — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:24:06 -0800

did he use it first? to what product or service is it connected through his use? somehow this seems like a waste of $ can I get a registrations on "waste of $"? I'll connect that service to Drew

By: Octoparrot

Octoparrot — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:26:42 -0800

Did anyone use NSFW prior to 2001? If not, I'm claiming the first usage from when I wrote some Everquest guild forum rules after clicking some NSFW content and getting pissed.

By: krinklyfig

krinklyfig — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:34:54 -0800

I'm gonna trademark "lame."

By: weapons-grade pandemonium

weapons-grade pandemonium — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:37:27 -0800

OK. Let's be serious. I claim the World's Richest Smiley.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:41:22 -0800

Wait! I call dibs on "This trademark application is worthless without pix!"

By: Lillitatiana

Lillitatiana — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:53:07 -0800

I always thought it was "not suitable for work." :/

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:54:22 -0800

Tell It To The Judge, Asshole™

By: Bighappyfunhouse

Bighappyfunhouse — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:56:07 -0800

This is a direct response to his failed attempt at the "Squirrel Nuts" patent

By: panamax

panamax — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:57:40 -0800

trademarking ™ you mofos

By: R. Mutt

R. Mutt — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:03:53 -0800

What the fuck is fark????

By: wendell

wendell — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:09:37 -0800

Not Safe For W~~ork~~endell. Fixed that for me. Next Mr. Curtis is going to sue Battlestar Gallactica over the similarities between "frak" and "Fark"...

By: clevershark

clevershark — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:14:25 -0800

Lowtax should join in by copyrighting the equivalent-but-different NWS (not work-safe).

By: mathowie

mathowie — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:22:56 -0800

WTF™

By: dhammond

dhammond — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:27:07 -0800

Christ, what an asshole™

By: scheptech

scheptech — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:29:32 -0800

meh™

By: Pants!

Pants! — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:32:26 -0800

Is this a joke?

By: wendell

wendell — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:41:03 -0800

This will not wendell.™ You people owe me.

By: divabat

divabat — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:41:05 -0800

I claim the alphabet. mwahaha...

By: zerobyproxy

zerobyproxy — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:41:06 -0800

I wish Pythagoras could have gotten some sort of intellectual copyrights on his well thought mathematical treatises. Could you imagine having to pay for math? Brilliant. Just fracking brilliant.

By: edgeways

edgeways — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:43:34 -0800

If can trademark ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ. All you fuckers owe me a shitton of money thats all I know.

By: "Tex" Connor and the Wily Roundup Boys

"Tex" Connor and the Wily Roundup Boys — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:52:46 -0800

If can trademark ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ. All you fuckers owe me a shitton of money thats all I know. How often do people really say "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ?"

By: goodnewsfortheinsane

goodnewsfortheinsane — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 21:02:04 -0800

Looks like the quick brown fox really did jump over the lazy dog.

By: cmgonzalez

cmgonzalez — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 21:17:59 -0800

LOLCATS (tm)

By: Ceiling Cat

Ceiling Cat — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 21:27:45 -0800

I am watching this ™

By: Alvy Ampersand

Alvy Ampersand — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 21:41:16 -0800

I'm trademarking lines 2 and 33 of ASCI goatse.

By: Alvy Ampersand

Alvy Ampersand — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 21:41:31 -0800

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 21:46:01 -0800

NSFW is my professional title, like CPA or CFP.

By: trip and a half

trip and a half — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 21:46:28 -0800

Paging Big Bird.

By: "Tex" Connor and the Wily Roundup Boys

"Tex" Connor and the Wily Roundup Boys — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 21:47:55 -0800

Congress should just eliminate the distinctions between trademark, patent, and copyright law. Nobody can keep it straight, and it's just boring. From now on, everyone's IP will be "copatrighmented."

By: maxwelton

maxwelton — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 22:00:34 -0800

I applaud this, if it brings us closer to a day of sane intellectual property laws.

By: Henry C. Mabuse

Henry C. Mabuse — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 22:17:44 -0800

He also voted for Bush.

By: mumkin

mumkin — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 22:19:14 -0800

This is only the opening salvo in, I fear. Someone's going to be getting a cease and desist soon.

By: champthom

champthom — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 22:36:31 -0800

You know, it's stuff like this that makes me glad I stopped reading Fark and get my news from actual newspapers. One of the best decisions I've ever made and I've been more productive as a result.

By: drstein

drstein — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 23:01:23 -0800

"I can probably pull "prior art" for NSFW out of email logs from the early 90s." And from the looks of it, the USPTO won't give a shit what you come up with. I think that's what Drew Curtis is trying to point out. Our patent system is a disaster. Wait until the patent trolls(tm) show up.

By: freshwater_pr0n

freshwater_pr0n — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 23:01:29 -0800

Ah, fuck. I came in too late in the thread, and the only acronyms left unclaimed are BBW and WWJD. Better than nothing, I suppose.

By: "Tex" Connor and the Wily Roundup Boys

"Tex" Connor and the Wily Roundup Boys — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 23:28:30 -0800

Nonsense. You can have "Lmao Zedong," and that's one of the best.

By: cogneuro

cogneuro — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 23:29:29 -0800

How often do people really say "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ?" Try it; it's easy.

By: zerolives

zerolives — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 23:41:48 -0800

Funny™

By: Paris Hilton

Paris Hilton — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 23:47:34 -0800

That's Hot™

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 23:55:48 -0800

WWJD? BBW!

By: I Got My Own Blog

I Got My Own Blog — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 00:05:31 -0800

Get Your Own Blog, Friend™

By: LiveLurker

LiveLurker — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 00:07:44 -0800

Well, FARK! You mean to tell me the internet's gone money up?

By: LiveLurker

LiveLurker — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 00:20:43 -0800

maxwelton is dead on..."I applaud this, if it brings us closer to a day of sane intellectual property laws." So who among us is "sane"? OH, no one! Well then....Carry on!

By: Samizdata

Samizdata — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 01:32:05 -0800

I'll call "OTL" for "Out To Lunch" as in "The server's OTL".

By: Optamystic

Optamystic — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 02:51:47 -0800

There is no way this is anything but a joke.

By: ersatz

ersatz — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 03:08:02 -0800

I fark in his general direction™.

By: bugbread

bugbread — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 05:20:30 -0800

drstein writes "I think that's what Drew Curtis is trying to point out. Our patent system is a disaster. Wait until the patent trolls(tm) show up." He's trying to show that the patent system is broken, not by trying to get a patent, but trying to get a trademark? How, exactly, does that work?

By: Saucy Intruder

Saucy Intruder — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 06:07:47 -0800

If Drew did in fact "invent" it, the fact that he waited 8 years to register with the USPTO - during which the term propagated across the internets - will render any registration unenforceable. This is classic genericide.

By: melorama

melorama — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 06:15:25 -0800

.™

By: melorama

melorama — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 06:16:49 -0800

Cool, now I have a monopoly on compassion.

By: ryanrs

ryanrs — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 06:37:52 -0800

meh. WP:POINT

By: notreally

notreally — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 07:19:43 -0800

Sucks when you get in late. Then you have to come up with an original. I'm going with MSFW. That's marginally safe for work.

By: Talanvor

Talanvor — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 08:03:04 -0800

Anyone get Ate my Balls™ yet?

By: drezdn

drezdn — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 08:16:36 -0800

I trademarked IANAL, but I've had trouble defending it.

By: arnold

arnold — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 08:21:37 -0800

do people still give a shit about fark?

By: Koko

Koko — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 09:01:26 -0800

DAVE'S NOT HERE ™

By: Kickstart70

Kickstart70 — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 10:12:23 -0800

Well, I decided to run with this a little. I posted a thread on Fark, which got a little notice but was not put to the front page, and then it was 'mysteriously' deleted (doesn't usually happen with submissions, and the ones before and after were still there). I've now sent Drew a note about how stupid and crass this is, and how it's even more crass to delete the thread when the cat's already out of the bag.

By: Slack-a-gogo

Slack-a-gogo — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 10:15:31 -0800

It makes as much sense as trademarking "let's roll" or the name of a small Eastern US city. At least I can still call him a douchebag without breaking any trademarks.

By: iamkimiam

iamkimiam — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 10:17:03 -0800

I love how somebody is trying to own the LABEL of being NSFW, and not the actual CONTENT. It's like everybody going nuts for beads at Mardi Gras. Some show up late and don't care about the breasts, they just want to walk away with something, anything, and say they've been there. And so they grab for shiny beads, whose temporary value just skyrocketed due to borrowed interest.

By: iamkimiam

iamkimiam — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 10:19:29 -0800

(which is not to say that I wasn't tempted to make a Fark jumped the shark trademark joke in there, but I couldn't seem to put it together.)

By: ZachsMind

ZachsMind — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 10:39:47 -0800

champthom: "..it's stuff like this that makes me glad I stopped reading Fark and get my news from actual newspapers.. It's stuff like this that makes me glad I stopped reading actual newspapers years ago and get all my news from MetaFilter. No. I don't get any of my news from Fark - what do you think I am? Crazy? I would joke trademark something, but I don't know how to make "TM" in little letters.

By: notmydesk

notmydesk — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 11:44:49 -0800

OMG

By: ill3

ill3 — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 11:50:24 -0800

I'd hit him

By: Rajamadan

Rajamadan — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 13:15:00 -0800

Fark that!

By: PareidoliaticBoy

PareidoliaticBoy — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 13:40:58 -0800

IQTMPOA™ I've Quietly Taken My Pants Off, Again.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 16:13:08 -0800

There's no such thing as bad publicity.

By: grimmelm

grimmelm — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 19:18:46 -0800

There are actually some pretty serious legal obstacles to this attempted registration. Most seriously, it's "descriptive." "Not safe for work" tells you that the link you're about to click on is, yes, not safe for work. That's a big no-no in trademark law. Your trademark is supposed to be something that consumers associate with your particular goods and services, not a term that describes a feature of the goods and services regardless of who supplies them. It doesn't matter if Fark was first. Since the phrase is descriptive, it can't be registered as a trademark unless people ignore the descriptive aspect and really do associate it with one particular supplier. Most people who see "not safe for work" understand it to mean what it says; they don't immediately think of Fark. There's also a trademark-law rule that bars registration of "immoral" and "scandalous" trademarks. That arguably applies here, but that rule has had less and less teeth over the years, as society gradually loses its ability to be scandalized by anything. Still, if I were a lawyer opposing the registration, I'd seize on it. And finally, given how widespread the phrase is now, not only is it arguably generic (which is the super-strength version of "descriptive" that prohibits registration no matter what people think), but there are also tons of other competing users now, and the trademark-law rules for sorting out which of them get to keep on using the phrase are fairly complex and fact-intensive. If I were teaching IP this semester, this would so have gone on the exam.

By: meehawl

meehawl — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 20:25:00 -0800

TM^TM^{^TM}^{^{^TM}}^{^{^™}}^{^{^{^™}}}

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 20:39:23 -0800

'd love to see the maharishi do THAT

By: dr_dank

dr_dank — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 20:55:26 -0800

Maybe Jeff will patent his technique for getting over it.

By: jscott

jscott — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 03:09:04 -0800

I am a trademark troll and I am getting a kick out of these replies.

By: Kickstart70

Kickstart70 — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 11:24:33 -0800

A note back from Drew:

yes we applied for it can't comment on the prank angle other than "stay tuned" muhahaha

So, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt temporarily. I hope that this doesn't really suck.

By: Samuel Farrow

Samuel Farrow — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 11:48:13 -0800

I bags brb in memory of the days before we could/would take our computers to the toilet with us.

By: Skeptic

Skeptic — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 14:29:39 -0800

Fer Chrissakes. 98 comments, and only one (grimmelm's) that makes any sense. First of all, trademarks are different from patents, which in turn are different from copyright. Trademarks are distinctive words or signs, associated to a product or service you offer. They don't have anything to do with invention, like patents, or creation, like copyright, they are just hallmarks you can use to identify the provenance of your products and services and distinguish them from those of your competitors. So, Coca-Cola^TM is a trademark, as is Microsoft^TM, or, wait for it, Windows^TM. Obviously, windows (you know, the holes in buildings, usually square, that allow you to look outside) had been invented some time before, but this was irrelevant since Microsoft^TM didn't patent windows, they trademarked the word Windows^TM. Also, Windows^TM would have been rejected as descriptive, if Microsoft^TM had tried to register it as a trademark for building materials, for instance. But it was accepted as a trademark for software. Likewise, Apple^TM would have been rejected as descriptive for fruit, but it was acceptable for computers, and this even though it had been registered as a trademark previously, and namely for music, by the Beatles^TM. (That did create some bother for Steve Jobs afterwards, though). So, what's the point of this trademark application for NSFW? It's very unlikely to fly, unless it's registered for very specific goods or services for which it can't be considered as descriptive. It won't prevent you from using NSFW, as long as you aren't confusing eventual consumers by trying to imply association with goods or services offered by Drew Curtis. It certainly won't say fuckall about the state of the patent system, since we are talking about a trademark. IMHO (not trademarked) this is just a juvenile stunt for a gullible, ignorant, and immature audience.

By: bugbread

bugbread — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 15:15:34 -0800

Skeptic: Don't worry, a few of us get the difference between patents and trademarks. Our comments just don't stick out as much as the stupid ones. One of the amusing things about applying for this trademark is that (like the Windows versus windows issue), since NSFW is explicitly a descriptor (it describes things as not being safe for work), the only way it could fly would be if he trademarked it for some meaning other than "Not Safe For Work".

By: F Mackenzie

F Mackenzie — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:45:13 -0800

Skeptic's and grimmelm's remarks make sense to me. Merits aside, I don't think this is a prank, because 1) using a corporate attorney rather than self-filing is an expensive prank; 2) the same corporate attorney on this filing has filed for marks on "Fark It" "Fark This" and "NSFW" in addition to "Not Safe For Work"; and 3) fark.com isn't playing this up on their own website despite user-posted articles. I'm imagining Mr. Curtis sitting down with his accountant and attorney to discuss his new-found wealth, and these guys asking him what intellectual property he has that he wants to protect or someday may want to sell. They go through a list. They start a trademark process on whatever they hope will stick. I think this is a realistic scenario, despite whatever chance of success it might have. And for the record, ROFL has a trademark (for specific goods).

By: louie

louie — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 12:24:04 -0800

F. Mackenzie: a trademark isn't that expensive; much cheaper than a patent. And presumably a lawyer you've already used for other things is the first one you'd go to if you needed a favor done, since you have some sort of relationship you wouldn't have with other lawyers. (Also, the reason grimmelm's comments make sense is because he cheats by having actual "expertise" ;)