atw: Re: BlackBerry devices? [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Hi Bruce

You're absolutely right - we've been replaying a discussion from back in 
March, which I'd forgotten. For me the difference is that then I wasn't 
writing documentation about BlackB ... s - those things, you know what I 
mean (I won't say "... devices" until I'm forced to!).

You're probably right too when you say I should take this issue more 
seriously. I'll follow up my email to RIM and see that it gets attention 
from the right people this time. 

But I can't resist wondering how we got ourselves into this ridiculous 
situation, where we're under threat from lawyers for using ordinary 
language - makes we want to see if I can get a trademark on the word 
"the". 

 And what purpose does this bullying serve? Janice gave a good explanation 
of how it works, but I still can't see what good these ridiculous measures 
can achieve for those companies. I'd have thought that a company whose 
product's name had become a household word would get more benefit than 
disadvantage from that - but they aren't satisfied with that. 

By the way, thank you for explaining that you weren't picking on me.  It 
does seem that you and I disagree about a lot, which probably comes down 
mainly to personality differences, but I hope there's more at stake here 
than our personalities.

Howard



"bja" <moo-man@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
Sent by: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
19/07/2007 08:45 AM
Please respond to
austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


To
<austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
atw: Re: BlackBerry devices? [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Topic





TRIM File Ref










Howard,
 
How can you recommend just using "BlackBerry", how can you  say using a 
generic term for a trademarked product is OK in certain  circumstances and 
how can you recommend "BlackBerrys" as a plural? These  statements are 
simply incorrect.
 
I am constantly amazed at how often we shoot ourselves in  the foot. We 
covered this exact issue (BlackBerry devices) at length on the  8th of 
March 2007 so the answers (as they so often are) can be found in 
the FreeList archives (www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter).
 
We should ALL look there first.
 
Sorry if I seem to be picking on you Howard because I'm not  particularly 
setting out to do that. There just seems to be a number  of apparently 
senior technical writers unfamiliar with this issue (as there  were back 
in March) and this really surprises me. Not so much in the fact that there 
was a lack of knowledge (we all have knowledge gaps) but in the fact that 
several gave WRONG information obviously without doing their research 
first.
 
And Ilana, we explained all this to you last  time because I am sure it 
was you who started the 'BlackBerry devices'  thread back in March. As 
such, what has happened between then and now to warrant  the repeat?
 
My 0.05.
 
Cheers,
 
Bruce


From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of  
Howard.Silcock@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, 18 July 2007 10:29  AM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re:  BlackBerry devices? [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]


Hi Ilana and others 

I'm also writing BlackBerry documentation  and  I'd certainly recommend 
just "BlackBerry". If people don't know what a  BlackBerry is, I don't 
think appending the word "device" will help them much. 

Using a generic term could be OK in  certain circumstances, but obviously 
it depends on the context - in some cases  you might want to distinguish 
the BlackBerry from other devices that could be  lumped under 'PDAs'. 

The plural is  certainly more problematical. I actually wrote to the 
manufacturers to ask if  they had a preferred plural but never received 
any reply. However, the consensus  here seems to be that the plural should 
be BlackBerrys. The rationale seems to  be an unwritten rule that trade 
names should be treated, like people's names, as  'regular' forms from the 
point of view of inflection - you'd call the family of  Mr Bowman 'the 
Bowmans', not 'the Bowmen'. In this context, it seems that  changing -y to 
-ies for the plural isn't regarded as 'regular', though the rules  for 
using -s or -es presumably would be incorporated in the regular form. (Mr 
Fox's family would be Foxes, not Foxs.) 

Steven Pinker's book 'Words and Rules' has some very interesting 
observations about this general topic. (He also discusses the issue of the 
 plural of 'mouse' at length, saying it's the question he's most often 
asked  about when lecturing on this.) 

Howard 

Howard Silcock 
Technical Writer 
Zare Pty Ltd 



idcohney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Sent by: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 

08/03/2007 03:47 PM 
Please respond  to
austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


To
austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
cc

Subject
atw: BlackBerry devices? 
Topic






TRIM File  Ref













Hi all,
I am currently writing a policy manual on BlackBerry  devices.  I would 
like your opinion on what terminology to  use.

Is the term BlackBerry accepted widely  enough so that I can use it 
without adding the word "device"? That is, do I use  the term "BlackBery" 
alone or do I need to call it a "BlackBerry  device"?

Following on from this, what is  more acceptable in the plural, 
"BlackBerries" or "BlackBerry devices"?  I  do not really want to have to 
use the word "device" if I can help it, but  somehow "BlackBerries" does 
not seem right.
Thanks for your  help.
Ilana
**************************************************
To post  a message to austechwriter, send the message to 
austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To subscribe to  austechwriter, send a message to 
austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with  "subscribe" in the Subject 
field.

To  unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
with  "unsubscribe" in the Subject field.

To  search the austechwriter archives, go to 
www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter

To  contact the list administrator, send a message to 
austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************************************************

Other related posts: