Conference 7.286::digital

    
    Great message...but how about integrating a marketing note to the
    front end...
    
    "Digital and its partners deliver solutions that..."
    
    (the rest of your message is right on...)
                                                              
    hm

    Nice tag, Greyhawk.  Maybe the company should book you on more of those
    MD-11 12-hour flights ;-)

    .0       NBR Tagline:
    
    .0                The Nightly Business Report is sponsored by Digital
    .0    Equipment Corporation (pause) engineering computers, software, and
    .0    services to connect you, and your company, to your employees,
    .0    your suppliers, your customers, (pause) and the world. Digital,
    .0    What Ever It Takes....
    
    Isn't that what we do?   Maybe (pause) the (pause) sentence
    structure(pause) is kind of funky and could be reworked but the main 
    message of the blurb seems to summarize our company in my opinion.  
    That (pause) guy always sounds like he (pause) has the burps... 
    
    Maybe if we replace the (pause) with periods... 
    
    	The Nightly Business Report is sponsored by Digital
    Equipment Corporation.  Engineering computers, software, and
    services to promote connectivity in your enterprise.  
    
    I am no Marketeer but this "WHAT EVER IT TAKES" which has since
    replaced "DIGITAL HAS IT NOW" etc...  as a phrase is not the best
    in my opinion - if anything we should invite potental customers to
    call us at 1-800 - whatever  like other vendors do...?
    

        and before I forget...
    
        It seems like alot of companies include their Internet home page
        pointer with their ads...     Maybe we should consider providing
        an invite for the Internet surfers to learn more about Digital and
        our products by providing our home page under the Digital logo?
    
    

    maybe we should change our logo in ads to be:
        _______________
    www.|d|i|g|i|t|a|l|.com
        ---------------
    
    		/jeff
    

    Bad thinking.  It's improper use of our trademark as a word, resulting
    in possible loss of use of the trademark.
    
    				Steve

    Not exactly use as a word...  
    
    But "within something else & not in Regal Isolation."  Another example
    of how antiquated laws (which still nevertheless ARE the laws and thus
    are to be obeyed) lag current practice, and act as a drag upon
    progress.
    
    I liked the idea, but saw Steve's objection as well.  Still, gotta get
    that http://www.digital.com/ thingie out there.
    
    Heck, I was driving Route 101 in the heart of Silicon Valley just
    YESTERDAY, and there's a RACETRACK there with THEIR website flashing
    from their MARQUEE for cryin' out loud!! :-)
    

    Heard the NBR thing last night - not the same as .0 but sounded
    like we got the point across. 
        
    Anyway with the frenzy to get your ideas out on the Internet (which by
    the way sells servers...) could we get someone in Marketing to look
    into this?                                                          

> Still, gotta get that http://www.digital.com/ thingie out there.

It's getting out there... ...I saw it posted below the |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| logo at
the end of the "internet ad" (gears).


- jeff_also_impressed_with_
  the_new_ad_campaign

    
    re: NBR - There are some specific "No's" in what you can have in a
    Sponsor billboard for PBS broadcasts - this includes specific next
    steps like 800 numbers, web site mentions, etc.  The price you pay for
    PBS is a softer sell. 
    
    We will continue to evolve and improve messaging here on NBR- right now we
    are particularly interested in having a more visual presentation that
    ties to the commercial TV spots. But we will take the above comments,
    where constructive, into account.
    
    Bill
    Bill
    
    
    
    
    
    

re: .7

I have been told and understand this and therefore was surprised when the 
pre-installed Windows 95 splash screen on my Celebris GL came up with (I don't 
remember exactly): 

Microsoft Windows 95 
brought to you by |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| Equipment Corporation.

	C'Ya,
	Wayne

    Re .10
    
    That's great.  I still haven't caught any of the ads.  Though I just
    saw a note from someone in the Internet Program Office that they were
    moving, as is IBM, to have corporate ads displayed from the corporate
    home page.
    

    re: .6 - thanks
    re: .7 - good point -- I certainly wouldn't want to risk our
    trademarks, logo's, etc.  On the other hand, isn't just having
    www.digital.com already weakening our position re: trademarks.
    
    /jeff
    

RE: .14

	The |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| logo is the the one that is trademarked, not
	the word "digital". Putting www.digital.com doesn't violate it.
	Putting www.|d|i|g|i|t|a|l|.com does.



								mike

    
    	Wait a minute. It is *our* logo. I was always under the impression
    we could use it any way we want. We are not talking about infringing
    on anything here. At the end of an ad having the line, "You can learn
    more about us at http:/www. (our logo) .com" seems to be perfectly
    appropriate.
    
    	Anybody in legal around to give us an opinion?
    
    		the Greyhawk

    I'm not a lawyer, I don't even play one on TV but I have lived through
    a trademark search for a product I was working on at a long past
    employer. In short you can't trademark common words, you must create a
    made up name (Kleenex for example) or design a unique graphic symbol.
    Digital is a common word so it can't be trademarked, the graphic symbol
    of the Digital logo is trademarked. Any time we use the logo as a word
    in a sentence we erode the credibility of our claim that it's a graphic
    symbol not a common word. 
    
    People have lost trademarks beacuse of this kind of thing, I think the 
    best known example of this is Thermos who lost their trademark, one of 
    the factors is that during the investigation it was found that they 
    frequently misued the trademark in internal memos as a generic term for 
    vacuum flasks including those of the competition. There are people who
    would love to see us lose the trademark since it restricts the way
    everybody else can use the word digital so splashing around a
    questionable use of the logo frequently and visibly would be dangerous.
    

re Note 4293.17 by TROOA::SOLEY:

>     of the Digital logo is trademarked. Any time we use the logo as a word
>     in a sentence we erode the credibility of our claim that it's a graphic
>     symbol not a common word. 
>     
>     People have lost trademarks beacuse of this kind of thing, I think the 
>     best known example of this is Thermos who lost their trademark, one of 
>     the factors is that during the investigation it was found that they 

        We seem to be confusing coined-words-as-trademarks and
        graphic-logos-as-trademarks.  The word "thermos", even when
        written as a normal word, was claimed as a trademark.  The
        digital logo, if written/spoken as a word, is simply
        "digital", on which we claim no trademark.

        We could have legitimately worried that the name "VAX" could
        become a non-trademark, since it was simply a sequence of
        letters, and not a particular graphic.  (But could you
        imagine the analogous situation to the "thermos bottle", in
        which some other computer company called their computer a
        "VAX"?)

        Bob

    Actually, we HAVE tried to claim the word "Digital" as a trademark (see
    earlier discussion in this conference), but nobody outside "Brand
    Marketing" took it seriously.  The graphic logo is a trademark and it
    is important not to use it as if it were the name or word Digital.
    
    				Steve

    
    Our legal counsel for trademarks is Larry Robins @MSO, who I work with
    closely.  Not only can't we embed the digital logo in any type of use
    like a wed site address, we need to be careful in how we use the logo
    with other logos, setting appropriate distances from other marks.
    Overall, the discussion Steve Lionel has had seems right on track.
    
    We need to be particularly careful in the various electronic/"cool"
    implementations people cook up for internet, including proper use of
    trademarks, etc., both digital's and other companies references.  
    There is REAL money at stake here.
    
    There is a full explication on the use of trademarks in VTX LAW. I
    think Larry has a general memo on use of trademarks and I will see if
    it is postable here.    
    
    Bill

...back to the subject of Greyhawk's note in .0...

Last night my wife and I heard the tagline and she asked me "What's that
supposed to mean?"  I didn't have a good answer.

I too say dump the current NBR tagline and go with Greyhawk's... and insert a
nice MOVING graphic image from one of the TV ads (or something that better
reinforces Greyhawk's tagline).  

In addition, the static black |d|i|g|i|t|a|l|(tm) billboard doesn't cut it
next to the other _dynamic_ images presented by other companies, IMO.


- jeff

    .21 The tagline seems to change from night to night or maybe its
    week to week...
    
    The verbage in .0 was not on 2 nights ago...

    
    re .21 - Take a gander at the special issue of DIGITAL Today for
    November for more background on the campaign and tag line.  
    
    re: Creative - answered in .11 - it is being worked.
    
    Bill

    Interesting discussion.  In fact, we do possess some legal rights in
    the word "Digital", usually in combination with other words, but not
    always.  A year ago we were able to persuade the United States Patent
    and Trademark Office that the word has "secondary meaning" when used to
    identify products and services from Digital Equipment Corporation.
    
    Bill's note is correct.  It is extremely important to maintain the
    visual integrity of the logo.  This does not preclude all use of
    associated design and verbiage (the Business Partner logo is an
    example), but the circumstances where additional matter can be
    displayed with the logo are very limited.
    
    Larry Robins
    Trademark Counsel

re Note 4293.24 by GAVEL::ROBINS:

>     Bill's note is correct.  It is extremely important to maintain the
>     visual integrity of the logo.  This does not preclude all use of
>     associated design and verbiage (the Business Partner logo is an
>     example), but the circumstances where additional matter can be
>     displayed with the logo are very limited.
  
        But what happens if we don't follow this advice -- will other
        companies start using the digital-in-blocks logo as their
        logo?

        How realistic are the threats?  I can imagine another vacuum
        bottle manufacturer calling its product a "thermos bottle",
        but I can't imagine another company calling its computer a
        "VAX".

        Bob

    Each time a mark is misused it is weakened.  The cummulative effect of
    misuse can result in abandonment of any legal rights in a mark.  This
    is rare.  The more likely result is a weakening of our ability to keep
    third parties from using confusingly similar, but not identical,
    designs or mark.
    
    Larry

After all, the Digital name is worth a whopping $10 to buyers.  I'm sure
there are lots of clone makers who'd jump at the chance to use it.

    Since I seem to have started a tempest-in-a-teapot here (and I
    appreciate the discussion so far), let me throw out a variation on my
    own idea to see if it has any merit:
    
    What about creating a NEW, trademarkable logo of the form:
    
    |w|w|w|.|d|i|g|i|t|a|l|.|c|o|m|
    
    close enough to the current one to indicate that it's the same company,
    but different enough to please the lawyers, etc.
    
    What do you think?
    
    /jeff

    
    	You're being nicely creative, Jeff. But I don't think it will have
    quite the same "look and feel" (remember *those* legal briefs
    sportsfans?).
    
    	But with all the cumulative brain power on this topis, we ought to
    be able to come up with something that has both style and pizazz. 
    
    	Maybe -
    
    
    			|d|i|g|i|t|a|l| 
    
    			  www.dec.com
    
    
    	;-)
    
    
    		the Greyhawk
    	

    That's www.digital.com, Greyhawk!  (Yes, I know that www.dec.com works
    too.)
    
    				Steve

    You missed the ;-).  I think he was trying to get some of the DEC vs
    Digital debate adressed (or at least make a joke about it).
    
    Steveg

Re 4293.25: "But what happens if we don't follow this advice -- will other
companies start using the digital-in-blocks logo as their logo?"

No, but they might begin using it against us in their ads without our
permission, like

	Beats that old stuff from |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| !

or

	Totally |d|i|g|i|t|a|l|-compatible, but
	better than |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| and fewer calories

___Pete

    There have been such abuses in the past, and we've been able to
    put a stop to them.  We would have a much harder time should we misuse
    our own trademark.
    
    					Steve

re.  www.dec.com

I think we must keep this address working (not sure if there are plans to
discontinue it?). Yesterday I was watching Bill Gates interview by media
person from UK and eventhough the interviewer was saying "Digital", Bill
Gates always said "DEC" in his reply.

Avinash

  I thought the difference was that www.dec.com was only accessible
  internally and that www.digital.com was our web-to-the-world and from our
  side you need a proxy to get beyond the firewall.

  I have a logical defined as:

    NO_PROXY = "dec.com, localhost"

  as well as a line in MOSAIC.COM that defines:

  Mosaic*NoProxy:                         dec.com, localhost

From the outside, both www.digital.com and www.dec.com reach the same thing.

From the outside, most ...dec.com sites are not reachable at all.

From the inside, getting to the www.digital.com site requires going through
a proxy server, thus from the inside, if you have proxies set up right,
attempting to access www.dec.com would try to bypass the proxy server and
would fail.  (If you don't have proxy bypass for dec.com enabled, www.dec.com
will work, but you're tying up proxy servers for all your internal traffic.)

/john

re Note 4293.32 by HERON::KAISER:

> 	Beats that old stuff from |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| !
> 
> or
> 
> 	Totally |d|i|g|i|t|a|l|-compatible, but
> 	better than |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| and fewer calories
  
        I think where I fundamentally disagree with the trademark
        police is that I don't think we should fear the above (at
        least not fear it any more than we would fear the same
        messages which simply identified Digital or its products in
        plain text).

        Most of the time such so-called "abuses" would simply be
        getting our logo in front of more people more often.

        Of course *some* of the uses would be negative, but the price
        of preventing them seems to be severe restrictions on what
        *we* can do with our own logo.  I doubt that in the balance
        we win.  I do notice that a lot of prominent logos from other
        companies (mostly in other fields) are used far more
        creatively than our own.

        Bob

>Gates always said "DEC" in his reply.

I'm starting to wonder if this is intentional,,,,

    Quick, send the Digital Corporate Censors after that man...  The last
    time he appeared to do that (remember the Microsoft Alliance
    announcement?), _mirabile scriptu,_ he had reconsidered his naughty
    ways by the time the transcript came out.  My advice to anyone troubled
    by this continuing PR nightmare is simplicity itself:  Order the
    transcript of that unlikely event from whichever media outlet issued
    it, and when it comes (surely our Corporate Minions can correct this
    next series of lapses as they have so neatly done in the past...?),
    place it under your pillow and sleep the contented sleep of the
    (self)deluded.
    
    Not you, Avinash...  This barb is directed elsewhere. :-)
                  
    

Re 4293.37 "We have nothing to fear but fear itself": in general I agree,
but it's not the way trademark law works, as I understand it.

> Of course *some* of the uses would be negative, but the price
> of preventing them seems to be severe restrictions on what
> *we* can do with our own logo.

Luckily the same applies to every trademark, not just ours.  Like every
other trademark holder, we *own* our trademark and are entitled to control
its use as long as we follow the rules.  In that respect it's like an
official portrait rather than a snapshot.  Others are perfectly free to
refer to us however they like -- Bill says "DEC", anyone can say "Digital"
or "Digital Equipment" -- but *we control* the trademark unless we do
something to lose that control.

The abuses exist to take advantage of that, or out of ignorance.

What else could we do?  We could create a snappy graphic that others would
like to use against us, then simply not trademark it.

___Pete

This weeks US News & World Report has an article
titled "How DEC has picked itself up off the deck"

http:\\www.agtnet.com/usnews/issue/digital.htm

(at least the page file name is correct!)

In the same issue I was intrigued to see that
DECDirect was number 4 in the top ten mail order
catalog companies for 1994.

http:\\www.agtnet.com/usnews/issue/catalog.htm

This weeks US News & World Report has an article
titled "How DEC has picked itself up off the deck"

http://www.agtnet.com/usnews/issue/digital.htm

(at least the page file name is correct!)

In the same issue I was intrigued to see that
DECDirect was number 4 in the top ten mail order
catalog companies for 1994.

http://www.agtnet.com/usnews/issue/catalog.htm
    
    =====
    
    Now that you mention it, I *did* see many mentions of DEC in the first
    article.  P'raps we best dispatch some of Digital's Finest to
    re-educate that rabble.  I thought that the basic precept of good PR is
    "at least spell our name right!" ...?
    
    :-)
    

    I recently saw a CTV Business Report that mentioned our rating as 3rd
    or 4th largest mail order catalog companies...but DECDirect was
    referred to as D.E.C.Direct (not dekdirect)!
    
    -doug

    Check out Digital's new underwriter credits on the Nightly Business
    Report on PBS.  Starting Monday, February 5, segments from our two TV
    commercials will appear in our 'sponsorship' message at the beginning
    and end of the program.
    
    The FCC has lots of rules about what can be said and shown, but we're
    definitely pushing the envelope and leveraging our mainstream messages.     
    
    Dave

    
    	Not bad....
    
    	I open this topic on the 25th of November and 5 February we change
    direction and focus.
    
    	Now who was it that said you can't teach an old dog new tricks?
    
        If Digital ever takes NOTES away from us poor hudddled masses,
    they're toast...
    
    
    			the Greyhawk
    	

    
    I guess .45 was a compliment - we'll take it that way.
    
    We in "Corporate Advertising" do listen - although we don't always agree. 
    But we do try to give a rationale in any case.  
    
    Bill