Now That Everyone Wants to Be a Geek, Lawyers Have Been Called
online.wsj.com
online.wsj.com
I told him not to worry and that another word would soon be coined to make fun of the true geeks, as always happens. People just can't resist tormenting people who are different.
I am a little surprised that it hasn't happened yet... But then, maybe I'm too old and not hip with the new slang.
As for Best Buy suing everyone for using the words Geek or Squad (and every-so-graciously allowing high schoolers to continue calling their teams 'geek squads' (that's sarcasm)) it's obviously ridiculous. I understand protecting your brand, but when you name your brand so generically, you automatically lose a bit of it. Just deal with it.
(If you have no idea what I'm talking about, read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_True_Scotsman)
"Nerd" used to be about the intellectualism of it, the replacement of certain social interactions with an indie academic mindset. Now, "Nerd" is a marketing demographic, replete with physical identifiers: black plastic frames, object fetishism, a certain "look."
P.S. Punk is still alive in Minneapolis and SoCal. It's just not popular, so the people who actually give a shit are active. However, the rejection of populism is cool, and "cool" attracts the populace.
That said, "true nerds" were never in it for the recognition as a "nerd" or as part of some "movement" they just were. And they will continue to be that way after the general populations has moved on to usurp some other image. They may not be called "nerds" but they won't care what they are called.
Most importantly, being a "geek" is not about an image, it's a way of looking at the world.
It's still a term that's viewed negatively by mainstream, so you're unlikely to see "Hacker Squad" signs.
Exactly like "geek". It used to be an insult.
For the mainstream, the prototype hacker is someone who does something nefarious over the internet with no regard for any damage he or she might do. That's not the same prototype we have in mind when we say "hacker." We include those guys with a certain amount of reluctance and distaste. To us, the prototype hacker is somebody like Richard Stallman, the Richard Feynman of Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman or What Do You Care What Other People Think, or the folks who perpetrated the classic MIT hacks (http://hacks.mit.edu/Hacks/misc/best_of.html). Most people wouldn't even understand why we include those guys unless we explained.
> I told him not to worry and that another word would soon be coined to make fun of the true geeks, as always happens. People just can't resist tormenting people who are different.
> I am a little surprised that it hasn't happened yet... But then, maybe I'm too old and not hip with the new slang.
I've heard/read the word 'neckbeard' used in this context.
Hot guy/girl wearing glasses: cool.
Overweight unkempt dude in a sweaty t-shirt: still not cool regardless of whether wearing glasses or not.
Perhaps, as often is the case, we'll end up defining ourselves at least partially in the negative. (Not cool, not leet... whatever.)
"Hacker" seemed to serve partially, for a while, until it became synonymous with every online break-in in the mainstream press.
I think 'hacker' has already reached that level of notoriety. Yet, many of us continue to use it. Because really, other than referencing each other, we never introduce ourselves by these titles. "Hello, my name is ____ and I'm a geek" is a little silly.
On the other end, phrases like "I suppose so, for us hackers anyway" would most likely be addressed to to another hacker. For the community, I think, it's unlikely that outside sentiments will affect the terminology that much.
7. What constitutes tradenmark infringement?
If a party owns the rights to a particular trademark, that party can sue subsequent parties for trademark infringement. 15 U.S.C. �� 1114, 1125. The standard is "likelihood of confusion." To be more specific, the use of a trademark in connection with the sale of a good constitutes infringement if it is likely to cause consumer confusion as to the source of those goods or as to the sponsorship or approval of such goods. In deciding whether consumers are likely to be confused, the courts will typically look to a number of factors, including: (1) the strength of the mark; (2) the proximity of the goods; (3) the similarity of the marks; (4) evidence of actual confusion; (5) the similarity of marketing channels used; (6) the degree of caution exercised by the typical purchaser; (7) the defendant's intent.
They sued a priest!
It may seem counter-intuitive, but Best Buy did the right and necessary thing to defend their trademark.
The point is that if they allow "God squad" to pass without comment, then they'll have to allow "Hot Dog Squad" as well. And then "Pho Squad" and "Grog Squad" will show up, followed by "Mop Squad" and "Pizza Squad" and "Gutter Cleaning Guy Squad". Pretty soon someone opens up a "Dork Squad" which is actually a Geek Squad competitor, but with the roads clogged with black and white and orange Beetles providing squad-themed services, there'll be enough precedent that it'll be impossible to defend.
That's a somewhat exaggerated scenario, but it's essentially the logic behind these apparently overly sensitive trademark defense cases.
[1] - Personally I think there should be accommodations for the fact that it's non-commercial.
Good thing PG used the word "Hacker" instead of "Geek", otherwise HN would have been on the chopping block, too :)
I go by programming geek. Same name for my blog. I'm working on a side project called Answers Geek.
It's only a matter of time I get sued for being a geek I guess.