Author: KarinsDad
Date: 09:56:39 10/19/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 18, 1999 at 19:43:43, Robert Hyatt wrote: [snip] > > >Doesn't change a thing. "Junior" is a proper thing to add to the name of a >'son' if the name matches the father exactly. It usually means "smaller >version" or "younger version" or "more recent version". You can go to the >local hardware store and fins a maul to split firewood that weighs 12 pounds. >You can find a 6-8 pound version. The big version is called "Paul" (from >Paul Bunyan I assume). The smaller version is called "paul junior". Same >thing for a 'machine' that makes bread. I have a "BBQer Junior" gas grill on >my deck. Etc. All perfectly natural. It is akin to naming a program "2" >and then getting offended when they say "DB 2" Appending "junior" to a name >is simply an everyday occurrence here. As is appending "senior" to the elder >of the father-son-grandson 'chain'... paul senior, paul and paul junior. And >when paul senior dies, typically everyone slides up the pole one notch... Have to disagree with you on this one Robert. Although what you say makes sense on the surface, it does not make sense with regard to these specific circumstances. It was very controversial of Dr. Hsu to use the name Deep Blue Junior when there is the obvious confusion with Junior. It was just as controversial of Amir Ban to use Deep Junior (with a similar motif, Deep means further down the graph in chess programs). However, I can understand Amir's desire to show that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Regardless of word usage in the U.S., when one product has a similar name to another product and both products compete in the U.S., the product which had the name first will often win in a court of law. The reason is that the assumption is made that the second product is attempting to acquire market share based on name recognition of the first product. If there was a maul called Junior and someone else then later came up with Paul Junior, I'm sure the company with the one called Junior would win in a court of law and the other product would have to change it's name to Mini-Paul or somesuch. And your analogy with "2" is an attempt to go to a nearly illogical extreme with an example. Very few people name ANY product based solely on a number or symbol (e.g. Pepsi One is not called 1). However, there are often products named on single words, regardless of other meanings of those words (such as Junior). KarinsDad :)
This page took 0.02 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.