Do netbooks need to be saved?
We have been on top of the situation with Psion Teklogix since the beginning, when they began notifying folks of their trademark for the term “netbook.” We listened to the response to this situation and even heard from the Psion representatives trying to explain their side of the issue.
A group in Australia thinks that netbooks are an endangered species due to this Psion thing and have started a grassroots campaign to “Save the Netbook.” I’m not sure it’s necessary, especially since no one has been sued yet (to my knowledge); but then again, I’m no lawyer. If you want to see what this campaign is trying to do or you want to help save the lowly netbook from an early demise, check it out.
dont worry, Psion is just a joke of a company holding out hopes a successful company like Intel will cut them a check. it will happen soon enough.
@TabLite: A 29-year old profitable company hardly seems like a “joke of a company” to me.
Change “Netbook” to “Web-book” problem solved.
At this point its the form factor, not the name, that has created the nitch in the market place. The association of this form factor with the term “netbook” has gone on long enough that its kinda ubiquitous at this point. Its likely to stick no matter how much paper the Psion lawyer’s want to sling. Too late Psion.
There are more important things at stake here in that it is one of the first times that the trademark system hasn’t been able to keep up with “Internet speed” on such a large scale.
Hopefully we will be able to put this to bed fairly quickly to establish a sensible precedent. It doesn’t help that this attack is most damaging to smaller entities unable to fight for themselves, such as netbook blogs now finding themselves without income and small manufacturers/retailers.
In any case it can’t hurt to join the join the grassroots movement, but it can certainly hurt to ignore it.
Don’t get me wrong… I’m not saying it’s OK to blatantly steal anything, but here’s how I see it… a kid plays with a toy for a while but throws it in a toybox never to be seen again. Parent throws it out or sells it in a garage sale and the kid complains when they see little Timmy playing with it the next day.
The same thing is true here… Psion doesn’t get any sympathy from me when they let their toy sit until somebody else starts playing with it and makes it the cool toy to have.
I’m all for copyright and patent protection and all that, BUT, you can’t knowingly stand in front of a moving train and then complain that you got run over by it (mostly because you’ll die, but that’s not the point).
It’s not a straightforward situation I’m afraid. I’ve given a lot of thought to this since it cropped up and I see both sides of the argument.
What would Apple do if someone started calling PDAs Newtons? They haven’t made them for a long time and they certainly have it trademarked still. Should they be entitled to stop the usage by others? It’s the same argument for Psion I believe.
That’s a great analogy but bear in mind that in this case it’s not the same toy. ‘netBook’ as Psion used it was a (largely insignificant) product brand. ‘netbook’ as exists today is a descriptive name for a generic class of laptop computers. The latter grew organically, completely independently of the former.
They really ought to STFU, dust off the old blueprints and proclaim themselves the market leader. All going to plans that’s what will eventually happen, but it seems they are intent on dragging their name through the mud first.
@James Kendrick There’s one *very* important difference between “Newton” and “Netbook”.
Newton is what we call an “arbitrary” trademark in that it’s a real word used in a way that has no connection with its actual meaning. The best example of this is the word “Apple” used in the context of computers. These, and “fanciful” trademarks (like Kodak, which was invented for the purpose) are the strongest types of trademarks.
Netbook on the other hand is descriptive in that it is a portmanteau of “Internet” and “Notebook”. As such it never should have been afforded protection in the first place.
“Netbooks” as we know them today grew organically because consumers can quickly associate a meaning with the term, however if a “Newton” PDA came into existence tomorrow then it would clearly be trying to hang on the coat-tails of Apple’s brand.
@savethenetbooks: “‘Netbooks’ as we know them today grew organically because consumers can quickly associate a meaning with the term” — “Grew organically?” Intel coined the term and pushed it on the market. It’s successful marketing by a big company stealing a trademark from a small one, born from an attempt to undercut the OLPC project. Good job playing the victim though. I’m sure Intel appreciates your efforts.
We’re not Intel, and besides Intel themselves are having enough trouble with netbooks because a> they’re cannibalising their own sales (they obviously make less selling Atom – about as much as a Celeron) and b> the latest models aren’t using Intel chips at all, rather ARM, MIPS, SoC, etc.
Psion has designed some great hardware like their famous 5mx but their problem is that beyond a cell phone everyone expects a computer with a keyboard to have Windows not a proprietary OS like Symbian from Psion.
Rather than crying about their netbook name of their less popular larger computer, they should come out with an updated Psion 5mx but scrap the Symbian and load MS Vista on it or license that form factor so others can make versions for Windows.
Nobody wants a Symbian OS netbook or computer.
That 5mx had one sweet keyboard in a pocket size form factor though, too bad they are too dumb to not release a Windows version.
@savethe[smalllaptops]: If you were Intel, I wouldn’t have implied that you bought into their marketing or that they appreciate your efforts to enable their trademark infringement.
@Sumocat: Crediting Intel with the netbook is a bit much don’t you think – they weren’t even involved until early/mid 2008. I’d be more inclined to credit Asus, but then again I don’t see much value in assessing which of the various vendors deserves the “most” recognition when there have been so many of them involved.
Accusing Intel (and us indirectly) of trademark infringement in the absence of any action is definitely too much and you might want to ease up on the slander.
@savethenetbooks: 1. Asus doesn’t use the term “netbook.” Neither does HP. Psion has specified this in their statements. Intel, on the other hand, has taken credit for (re-)introducing the term:
http://blogs.intel.com/technology/2008/03/thoughts_on_netbooks.php
2. Psion has already made the accusation of trademark infringement through legal action. I am reiterating the accusation, not renewing it.
3. How do you expect to fight Psion’s legal action when you don’t even know the definition of “slander?” Seriously, have you done any research into this endeavor?
@Sumocat: surprised you’re still at this…
Acer: “Acer’s all-new ultra-lightweight, ultraportable netbooks were designed to bring you the ultimate in mobile freedom. Combining all the simplicity, quality and ease of use you expect from Acer with everything you need to stay connected, chat and manage your life on the road, these Netbooks are set to change our expectations of simplicity on the move.”
HP: The *title* of their product page is “HP Mini 1000 Netbook Computers” FFS.
Intel: They were one of many. FWIW Microsoft credit them with it too. We don’t.
2. Psion sent some a bunch of warning letters – you came out and stated it as fact.
3. “slander: a false, malicious statement (spoken or published), especially one which is injurious to a person’s reputation”. Sounds pretty much spot on to me.
You seem to know a hell of a lot about Psion for an unbiased commentator (their 29 year age for example)… they may well not have been a “joke of a company” before but with these antics it’s not so sure.
@Save the [small laptops]: You’re still at this. I thought you had more important things to do.
1. Okay, you got me on HP. They were initially off the hook for not using the term in their product names, but obviously they’ve embraced the category. I should have left it with Asus for not using it, but credit where it’s due: Intel (re-)introduced the term. Not that I’m accusing you of giving credit where it’s due.
2. It’s a fact that the trademark is registered and others are using it, but I haven’t accused you of infringement. You going to sue me on behalf of Intel?
3. “Slander refers to a malicious, false and defamatory spoken statement or report”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation
“Slander is an untruthful oral (spoken) statement…”
http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/term/85BAB88B-0660-4AB6-A2F5C32E716A6D52
“A false defamation (expressed in spoken words, signs, or gestures)…”
http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/s052.htm
Show me one instance where I uttered a word about you.
4. You seem to know very little about Psion, trademarks, legal terms, logic, or anything else that might be relevant to your endeavor. You can see I have access to the Internet, right? Behold the source of my hell of a lot of knowledge: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psion. Yeah, that was really f’n hard.
5. I never claimed to be unbiased, but your implication is unfounded, false, and malicious. You might want to ease up on the libel.