DBC TM

[Christopher Wright]

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Lurker" <lurker at mailinator.com> wrote in message 
> news:gkanpu$2l9f$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> "Design by Contract is a registered trademark[1] of Interactive Software 
>> Engineering, Inc. in the United States"
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_contract
>>
>> Does Digital Mars has permission for ISE to use the DBC trademark? This is 
>> not an attack to the D language but I was just curious if Walter had 
>> spoken with someone at ISE about it.
> 
> According to that page the term was coined in 1988, but they never applied 
> for a trademark on it until 2003. I'm no lawyer, but how valid could that 
> possibly be?

A trademark is valid if you treat it as a trademark and defend its use. 
It can be invalidated if it is too broad, or too obvious a term for what 
it is used for. It can also be invalidated if it *becomes* a generic 
term for what it is used for (xerox, bandaid, kleenex...).