[unyttigfjelltol]

It's more like Xerox probably sort of liked that people viewed them as interchangeable with the act of photocopying, but eventually this had textbook consequences for their ability to prevent people from using their name for things they didn't like.

I personally would have suggested offering you a license to use the web address, but for whatever reason that ilk of lawyers prefer antisocial methodologies.

[Dylan16807]

> eventually this had textbook consequences for their ability to prevent people from using their name for things they didn't like

Like what? I've never heard of such a use.

[zinekeller]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_trademark

Xerox was eventually successful (at least in US), but there are cases like Bayer's Aspirin (surprise!) that were genericized.

[User23]

The Aspirin and Heroin trademark revocations were punitive and due to the war, not due to lack of proper defense.

That’s why you will see non-Bayer acetylsalicylic acid literally marketed as “Aspirin” but even though the Kleenex trademark is considerably weakened, you still don’t see competitors openly labeling their products with the name.

[bombcar]

Bayer didn’t seem all that concerned with defending Heroin™.

[maicro]

"Hey, can you xerox me a few copies of this document real quick? Yeah, just use the Canon all-in-one on my desk." Little clunky, but I'm certain it's been said somewhere/somewhen.

[Dylan16807]

Is that enough to qualify as "things they didn't like"? I was thinking something actually distasteful.

[jonny_eh]

Or a case where someone goes to a store to buy a "Xerox machine" and is sold a Canon? I can't imagine it.

[unyttigfjelltol]

Ok, looks like Xerox pulled their mark back from being merely "generic".[1]

[1] https://www.justia.com/intellectual-property/trademarks/stre...