The warfare over "SLArt" has escalated with a lawsuit aimed at Linden Lab and an SL resident by Artworld Market.
Virtually Blind has details.
In January I wrote a little SL Art News* post about the trademarking of the term, and received a thoughtful comment by Nebulosus Severine, who said, "Perhaps it does seem silly to trademark the term, but the fact is that he did pay money to legally own the rights to it, regardless of anyone's personal opinion of whether or not he "should" have done it. Would I have trademarked it if I had been him? Probably not, but I don't think he is an asshole for doing so.
When he started his SLart blog/magazine/group, "slart" was NOT a widely used term because the art scene in SL wasn't nearly as widespread as it is now, contrary to popular belief -- it has really exploded only in the past year. Of course, it does make sense that "slart" would become an obvious term in association with art created within SL, but he trademarked the name before it was widely used. That fact might be annoying to some people, but so what? Why make such a big deal over nothing? I personally prefer "SL Art"; I think the word "slart" sounds rather corny.
I made sense for once in my reply when I said, "I don't disagree with many of your points, especially that the term SL art is prefererable.
For me, though, any made-up word starting with SL is just a common part of the lingo of SL and anyone trying to claim it as a personal possession is out of line.
It's very much like right of ways. "Everyone" uses a particular route (adding SL to words) but suddenly one portion of it is fenced off and someone says he owns it. "Pay me money to cross." If that part of the right of way is lost, it seems as though the rest is in jeopardy."
*Which is a blog I started in 2005 and don't pay enough attention to.
posted by - 1:53 AM