Randal may still have a point if the company in question hasn't lost the copyright yet. It's entirely possible for someone to overlook a box of "tissues" because they were looking for "Kleenex".
Hide / Show Replies
While the second paragraph is actually pretty interesting, I'm not sure it belongs in the description. It should probably be moved to Analysis.
Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.
Thing is I think that animated Clerks conversation is the entire inspiration for dedicating a page to this on a T Vtropes site. I know why I looked for it.
So might as well analyze it.
"•Superhero (super-powered, costumed crimefighters in comic books; this word is jointly trademarked by Marvel and DC Comics. Though "super hero" and "super-hero" are free for anybody to use, which sorta defeats the purpose.) "
I believe this is inverted. It was my assumption that Marvel and DC own the trademark for "super hero" and "super-hero", but not "superhero". Note that all media by the companies uses the two-word versions. Meanwhile, Who Wants To Be A Superhero, which was not run by either of those companies, uses the single-word version.
Hide / Show Replies
"* Ramen (instant noodles) in the US."
Any American tropers know if this is actually a brand name? I though it was just derived from the Japanese noodle dish, which isn't a trademark or brand.
Hide / Show Replies
Yes, its an actual brand in the United States.
Being in a Japanese-produced work is not enough of a difference to warrant its own trope.
I skimmed the linked Wikipedia article, but I couldn't find any evidence that "elevator" was originally a brand name. Should I go ahead and remove it, or does someone have an alternative citation?
Hide / Show Replies