Adobe® Photoshop® Software
<div class="IPBDescription">aka PHOTOSHOPP'D</div><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Photoshop trademark must never be used as a common verb or as a noun. The Photoshop trademark should always be capitalized and should never be used in possessive form, or as a slang term. It should be used as an adjective to describe the product, and should never be used in abbreviated form. The following examples illustrate these rules:
Trademarks are not verbs.
CORRECT: The image was enhanced using Adobe® Photoshop® software.
INCORRECT: The image was photoshopped. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href="http://www.adobe.com/misc/trade.html#photoshop" target="_blank">http://www.adobe.com/misc/trade.html#photoshop</a>
wow their policy screams "WE ARE ASS HOLES" XD
Trademarks are not verbs.
CORRECT: The image was enhanced using Adobe® Photoshop® software.
INCORRECT: The image was photoshopped. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href="http://www.adobe.com/misc/trade.html#photoshop" target="_blank">http://www.adobe.com/misc/trade.html#photoshop</a>
wow their policy screams "WE ARE ASS HOLES" XD
Comments
I do not advocate piracy of Adobe® products.
(since you can't hear tone of voice from text, you can't know if I'm sarcastic or serious can you? Ha!)
Pixels are related to pixies.
This is a enhanced image using Adobe® Photoshop® software, I can tell by the pixels and by having seen quite a few enhanced Adobe® Photoshop® software images in my time.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
fix'd
What? Are they crazy? Most companies would kill for that kind of brand recognition. It's like when people say "hand me a kleenex" or "I'd like a coke" (even though they mean any soda type beverage).
This just makes absolutely no sense as to why they would want this. Maybe they think it's because it's used in a negative light?
Photoshop is a trademarked name. If Adobe doesn't attempt to fight for their trademark when trademark infringement occurs, they'll potentially lose protection of said trademark.
As much as a company wants to be considered first, they don't want to potentially lose their trademarks in the process.
Which is why they dont want Photoshop becoming a common verb or a noun.
If they lose their trademark Bob could make his own program called "Bob's Photoshop".
Which is why they dont want Photoshop becoming a common verb or a noun.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bingo.
Realistically no, technically yes.
<img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink-fix.gif" />
(I hope someone gets that reference, lest I come off as a bigger dork)
If they lose their trademark Bob could make his own program called "Bob's Photoshop".
Which is why they dont want Photoshop becoming a common verb or a noun.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is exactly correct. For that same reason Google has been publicly against people using "google" as a verb. No one is dumb enough to think that it's anything but free publicity. The problem is that if you don't take action to defend your trademark then it can be challenged in the courts and you might lose it.
If they lose their trademark Bob could make his own program called "Bob's Photoshop".
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How exactly does someone lose their trademark?
How exactly does someone lose their trademark?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
When the name becomes the commonly used word for a product. Like, a piece of kleenex, or making a xerox.
Adobe has sand in their nether regions.
CORRECT:
You need to tell your Lawyers® to Relax©.
Being promoted to a part of speech is like the holy grail of the Internet. I use Paint Shop Pro to digitally photo-manipulate things and people still call them "photoshops"
But the company doesn't lose the trademark right? This is what I'm not getting.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
According to the law, if the word becomes the common usage and the company doesn't attempt to protect it's trademark, then a court can rule that they no longer have the exclusive right to use the trademark.
Which they can't complain about.
INCORRECT:
Adobe has sand in their nether regions.
CORRECT:
You need to tell your Lawyers® to Relax©.
Being promoted to a part of speech is like the holy grail of the Internet. I use Paint Shop Pro to digitally photo-manipulate things and people still call them "photoshops"
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
...
Does what everyone else has said mean nothing to you? Or are you just hoping to make your own Photoshop knockoff with the PS name attached?
According to the law, if the word becomes the common usage and the company doesn't attempt to protect it's trademark, then a court can rule that they no longer have the exclusive right to use the trademark.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is correct.
as people keep bringing up the Xerox/Kleenex thing I will comment.
Both of those companies have had brushes with losing their trademarks, and now respond very forcibly when they can.
Yes, having your brand name associated with with the type of product you sell is awesome for companies, HOWEVER if they do not show that they are actively protecting. They don't have to sue a magazine that mentions xeroxing a document, however they WILL send them an official letter letting them know something along the lines of "Xerox is a trademarked name. If you continue to incorrectly use our Trademark we will sue your punk asses.".
Photoshopping is something people do.
CORRECT:
Paul, I slept with your wife, Lois - I am SO sorry. See you at work.
...
Does what everyone else has said mean nothing to you? Or are you just hoping to make your own Photoshop knockoff with the PS name attached?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
quiet, you're ruining my plans for world domination
According to the law, if the word becomes the common usage and the company doesn't attempt to protect it's trademark, then a court can rule that they no longer have the exclusive right to use the trademark.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How can they protect it anyway, tell me it's stop?
That's a bullsh*t law.
How can they protect it anyway, tell me it's stop?
That's a bullsh*t law.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They protect it by simply doing what adobe did. Have it documented somewhere that they took steps to protect their trademark. They don't have to sue people who are using it in everyday speech, but they need proof that they did attempt to protect it.
Adobe doesn't ACTUALLY want you to stop using it, but they need evidence that proves they attempted to protect it. So if some time down the road they try and sue bob because he named his program photoshop.
so they want everyone to use it, but they have to be able to prove that they didn't want everyone to use it just in case someone uses it in a way they didn't expect.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly.
Though Im pretty sure they know which kinds of uses they would sue over.
How can they protect it anyway, tell me it's stop?
That's a bullsh*t law.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They can't, however your license to use photoshop can be suspended over it..