| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (16)

Posted: Jan 24th 2008 11:44PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Reposted comments I left elsewhere (with edits):

Several months ago, I had been asked to participate in a weekly SL art web show (which I later turned down, since I was unable to make the commitment). When it came time to brainstorm a name for it, "SLart" was one of the suggested names. I immediately shot that down because I knew of ArtWorld's blog, magazine, and group, and I didn't think it would be right to take the name that someone had already claimed. At the time, I had no idea he had trademarked the term "SLart"; I refrained from using the term out of professional courtesy. I didn't automatically assume I was entitled to use it.

In fact, I had no idea he had "SLart" trademarked until a couple of days ago.

Perhaps it does seem silly to trademark the term, but the fact is that he did pay money to legally own the rights to it, regardless of anyone's personal opinion of whether or not he "should" have done it. Would I have trademarked it if I had been him? Probably not, but I don't think he is an asshole for doing so.

When he started his SLart blog/magazine/group, "slart" was NOT a widely used term because the art scene in SL wasn't nearly as widespread as it is now, contrary to popular belief -- it has really exploded only in the past year. Of course, it does make sense that "slart" would become an obvious term in association with art created within SL, but he trademarked the name before it was widely used. That fact might be annoying to some people, but so what? Why make such a big deal over nothing and carry on like a spoiled child because you can't get your way? I personally prefer "SL Art"; I think the word "slart" sounds rather corny (no offense, Mr. Minsky).

You might think he is a "SLasshole," but he has taken many strides to help get SL art recognized as a legitimate art form, which is something I am keen to see happen.

I will repeat this for emphasis: When he filed for the trademark, "SLart" was NOT widely used. Do a little research.

Posted: Jan 25th 2008 3:32AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Sure that the term was not in use as it is now. In december 2006 second life had less than 2.5 million residents.
And it is not important if it was widespread use. It was in use and that was enough to show Mr. Minsky that something is not his but public. Nor that is important, that only shows a bit of his personality. What is important is that the term is descriptive so it cannot actually be used as a trademark.
Check Virtually Blind http://virtuallyblind.com/2008/01/25/slart-trademark/#comment-14356 for a good comment on this.

And it is important. Do you leave every little piece of scum to steal public property around just because that piece of property is not the best looking we have?

Posted: Jan 25th 2008 3:51AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Whatever the circumstances of the trademark being granted, prior use and so forth not necessarily withstanding under ยง 1051 of the act - Minsky's in the right by law, unless successfully challenged.

Trademark challenges, like patent challenges need to be done with care. A bungled challenge can make things much harder for any future challenges (there's a kind of double-jeopardy principle in effect).

Until such a challenge succeeds, Minsky has the sole right to use or authorize the use of the term, per US Federal law, whatever the circumstances or motivations are behind obtaining it.

You might see this as a deficiency in the regulations that govern the USPTO - and you would definitely not be the first to do so.

Posted: Jan 27th 2008 4:52PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Dandellion, why not challenge this in US Court if you feel he "stole" it from the community? Get over it. Move On. People are presenting you with the facts and you don't seem to care and want to bang that war drum anyway.

I love your "Oh another one that will persuade us, the five-olders, that mr.trademark is a saint!" comment, it shows how ignorant you are of this situation.

Posted: Jan 28th 2008 6:28AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Would you be so kind to present my ignorance? I am not sure that my comment after what you have quoted is ignorant. Maybe you should reread trademark law.

Posted: Jan 20th 2008 1:10AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
OK, I applied and got a trademark for "SL avatar". You all owe me 1L$ per month or you have to login just in IMs that is without avatar.

How can one trademark a word that is in common use?
Not to mention how can one be such a greedy bastard to do so.

Posted: Jan 20th 2008 1:13AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well, I'm not sure if I'd ever heard the term prior to SLart magazine's launch.

But then, McDonald's has the trademark on "real beef" last I looked.
Reply

Posted: Jan 21st 2008 6:00PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Honestly, moves like this make Mr Minsky appear to be a jerk of the highest order. The term was in wide-spread use in the art community prior to his copyright attempt. I believe his efforts to quash its regular use will be in vain as it use is fairly well embedded into the grain of SL.

Posted: Jan 21st 2008 7:38PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Not content to hijack common language for profit, he's now using the very people he's harassing for his own benefit. Today, I noticed that Mr Minsky has created his own entry in the very wikki he went after for using the term "SLArt".

http://virtualartpedia.a.wiki-site.com/index.php/Slart

As this is a community driven wikki, I feel the article is missing a few vital facts about the issues. I also noted there is no entry for Minsky himself in there. Anyone with some HTML exp care to help out?

Posted: Jan 21st 2008 7:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Minsky has done more for the arts community in SL then
any one person that I know! He is a mentor and inspiration to hundreds of artists both in and out of SL, a visionary who has created
a RL magazine to help elevate the status of art in SL in the
RL, and he's a fellow artist with boatloads of talent and goodwill.

I applaud him on the success of SLART (tm) Magazine. As an artist in SL, I have no problem with what he is doing. Instead of trying to find people to gang up on him, I think our time would be better suited to making art, discussing it, sharing it, and learning from one another.
Come to "Art Talk" at Artropolis on Monday nights at 6:30 pm slt and we can discuss this issue more!

Posted: Jan 22nd 2008 2:31AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Now, this is a really gross example of bad approach to public communication. What are we? Five-year-olds?

Posted: Jan 22nd 2008 2:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
My take on the matter: http://loki-popinjay.blogspot.com/2008/01/art-of-making-money-of-slart.html

@Brent: I added a line to the wikki-page this morning ;-) So did someone else yesterday. This morning the text was gone. Wonder if mine will still be there tomorrow...

Posted: Jan 22nd 2008 2:21PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Despite whether this term was used before he filed for a trademark on it (I never saw it before he used it), he's the one who DID file for it and it was approved. He had a purpose to trademark it, not to be a "jerk" so that everyone else has to acknowledge it's his word and stop using it, but because of his magazine. Who cares if the magazine is being used for profit or not, that is totally irrelevant.

He followed the legal steps and did nothing wrong, so everyone stop acting like babies and move on with your life.

Posted: Jan 22nd 2008 3:13PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Richard Minsky is not the enemy.

Did anyone take the time to Google this guy? He is an amazingly gifted artist and theorist and has been involved in artists rights longer than many artists in SL have been alive.

Yes, capitalism sucks, but SL is a capital construct with a traded currency and IP protections and tradmark opportunities for everyone. Trademarking something is part of the rules of the game.

Why not pick on Nissan or Coke if you want to oppose tradmarking and exploitation in Second Life? Attacking another artist is stupid and will do nothing but divide the community further.

Peace,

DC Spensley is DanCoyote in SL

Posted: Jan 22nd 2008 6:06PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Oh another one that will persuade us, the five-olders, that mr.trademark is a saint!
He did trademarked it, but he did it on false presumptions. One cannot trademark something that is publicly used before. One cannot trademark a term that is not distinctive for the product. And mind you to rexplain, how does the art produced and presented by mr. Minsky distincts from other art in second life so it can and should be labeled as SLart?

Posted: Jan 22nd 2008 8:47PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I mostly agree with Dandellion here: what gives him the right on this terminology? If he ever had one, it now falls under 'generic' use. Neither is he supposed to attack avatars that mention SLart in their profile to protect his trademark.

As for Coke in Second Life, they are rather loose with their trademark here. ;)

Featured Stories

Coming soon
Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW