To Photoshop or not :P

[Nexahs1138]

We all know Adobe hates us using it this way, but who else reckons John Knoll is the one that started the trend of using it as a verb?

[c.pfaffenbichler]

Seems it’s already listed as a transitive verb on Merriam-Webster’s …

Photoshop | Definition of Photoshop by Merriam-Webster

[Katie Houghton]

I think we are stuck with the usage... it has made it to mainstream. Will & Grace used it years ago in an episode!

[Test Screen Name]

This seems a particular habit of American English, to turn a perfectly good noun into a verb. Owners of trademarks hate it because it's one step to losing it. In Britain we are not immune, as the verb "to hoover" comes from a popular brand of vacuum cleaner but is used for all of them in the way Adobe don't want to see "to Photoshop" being used.

As Calvin said, "Verbing weirds language".

[Nexahs1138]

I love the hoovering one (Irish here btw) I didn't know hoover was a brand and not a general word until I was 15... and I had a Hoover washing machine during those years   TBF the Knoll brothers invented the software and I doubt they have a problem with it at all.

To verb or not to verb, that is the irony.

[Trevor.Dennis]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Test+Screen+Name  wrote

In Britain we are not immune, as the verb "to hoover" comes from a popular brand of vacuum cleaner but is used for all of them in the way Adobe don't want to see "to Photoshop" being used.

I always used to get a kick out of seeing the Hoover Building on the North Circular road (before they built the M25)  I believe the building is listed, as a nice example of Art Deco architecture, so they have this as a legacy along with the name.  Is the company still going?

Someone mentioned having a hoover, and my immediate thought was thank goodness it was not a Hotpoint.  Being known as the source of the huge Grenfell fire can't have been good for the brand name.

[Ussnorway]

Trevor.Dennis  wrote

can't have been good for the brand name.

'Flash' anyone?

[Nexahs1138]

Ussnorway  wrote

Trevor.Dennis   wrote

can't have been good for the brand name.

'Flash' anyone?

Which Flash?

P.S.

A Flash made in Flash.

[Nexahs1138]

Sure they even have a hoover dam look at the size of that hoover, must have some serious sucking capability.

[Ussnorway]

isn't that where they keep the spaceships that crash here?

[Nexahs1138]

I think they split it between themselves and Area 51, but Hoover Dam is where the Transformers are kept.

[Peru Bob]

Since this is not a request for technical help, I've moved this to the Lounge Forum.

[Nexahs1138]

It was a general discussion about Photoshop

[Peru Bob]

Sorry.  I guess my post was a bit terse.

[Nancy OShea]

It's the same as 

to Xerox

to microwave

to nuke

[jane-e]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Nancy+OShea  wrote

It's the same as 

to Xerox

to microwave

to nuke

Nancy, Xerox is trademarked; microwave and nuke are not.

Victory for Xerox as IPAB upholds its trademark status | Newsletter 40 - S.S.Rana & Co.

[Nancy OShea]

jane-e  wrote

Nancy, Xerox is trademarked; microwave and nuke are not.

Victory for Xerox as IPAB upholds its trademark status | Newsletter 40 - S.S.Rana & Co.

Yes. Xerox is trademarked.  But Nuclear is an adjective and Microwave is a noun yet we treat them as verbs. 

And sometimes we convert adjectives to nouns as in Going Postal (losing control in the workplace).

Nancy

[jane-e]

Nancy, okay, I see where you were going with that now!

I was married to a Patent Examiner for 16 years and learned a lot about patents and trademarks back then.

I came in to this thread thinking that if Adobe allows "photoshopping" or "photoshopped" to mean editing a photo with any image editing software, then they are in danger of losing their trademark. That's why they can't and don't allow it.

Singer lost their trademark when it became generic for sewing machine, and were actually able to get it back. Now companies have learned to take cautions to do whatever it is they need to do to keep their trademarks.

So back to the OP, it's not a question of whether or not Adobe hates it, it's that they have to protect their trademark.

[Nancy OShea]

I see what you mean.  But when I make my shopping list, I use tradenames for generic items as I'm sure most people do.   For example:

Is it Kleenex or a box of facial tissues? 

Band-Aids or a box of adhesive bandages?

Windex or window cleaning solution? 

Jello-O or gelatin dessert mix?

And my favorite is Q-tips.  I honestly don't know what else to call Q-tips except Q-tips.

People use tradenames to communicate.  That's not going to stop no matter how hard companies try to regulate it.

[jane-e]

Nancy, I am with you 100% and I do the same! I will even admit to using "photoshopping" (lc) as a verb. It is not up to us consumers to stop; it is up to the companies to keep telling us we are wrong (if I remember correctly from the Patent Office lawyer ex whom I have not seen in over two decades.)

In this case, where the OP asked about Adobe and Photoshop, legally Adobe has to protect their trademark. I don't know all of the specifics of what they have to do.

Everything I know about copyright and trademark, I learned from him, and it's been useful info over the years.

[Nexahs1138]

jane-e  wrote

Nancy, I am with you 100% and I do the same! I will even admit to using "photoshopping" (lc) as a verb. It is not up to us consumers to stop; it is up to the companies to keep telling us we are wrong (if I remember correctly from the Patent Office lawyer ex whom I have not seen in over two decades.)

In this case, where the OP asked about Adobe and Photoshop, legally Adobe has to protect their trademark. I don't know all of the specifics of what they have to do.

Everything I know about copyright and trademark, I learned from him, and it's been useful info over the years.

It's the same with anything that someone else purchases though, yes Adobe purchased the licence but they weren't the creators, same can be said for Disney, they bought Lucasfilm but they can't stop people using Star Wars ideas because Lucas always intended for it to be parodied. Like what was said above with various products, hoover being a prime example, you also have Google, which is a browser but Google is also a verb.

Interesting factoid, you can upload anything from the original films onto YouTube and nothing will happen but if you put up stuff from the Family Guy Star Wars series then it'll be copyrighted. Someone tried putting up the barge scene and it was copyrighted but the original footage wasn't.

[Nexahs1138]

Over this side of the world we call them cotton buds (y'all say swabs) because they're cotton and bud shaped, although there isn't a different name for them, here's the wiki article.

You Americans really did butcher the English language; Jell-O = Jelly, Jelly = Jam.

[JR Boulay]

We do not have this problem with Acrobat.

[Nexahs1138]

Pffft you mean the PDF viewer? I doubt people even know that has a name

[c.pfaffenbichler]

Pffft you mean the PDF viewer?

Acrobat (as opposed to Acrobat Reader) is not just a PDF viewer but a PDF editor …