Yeah, that's the trend in US District Courts. I was surprised to see a
quote apparently helpful to the applicant without even a footnote for the
proposition "oh, but it's Wikipedia."
Frank
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 4:49 AM, Newyorkbrad <newyorkbrad(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Interestingly, here's a recent TTAB decision
(albeit non-precedential) that
was recently linked on WR, holding that a Wikipedia article may NOT
generally be used to establish controverted facts in a registration
proceeding:
http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/ttabvue-91188584-OPP-10.pdf
This is consistent with the weight of the (court) caselaw in the US.
Judges
sometimes cite Wikipedia articles for uncontroversial background
information, but hold that they aren't admissible to establish disputed
facts -- in large measure, simply relying on the on-wiki disclaimers.
Newyorkbrad
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 10:15 PM, Cool Hand Luke <
failure.to.communicate(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I've just awarded a
barnstar<
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:EJSawyer#Precedent_Barnstar>to
an editor who contributed a key word to an article quoted by the
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board in the case *In re Trek 2000*.
As it turns out, the TTAB allows references to Wikipedia, which I find to
be
insane. An IP attorney blogging about the decision gamely noted that
"Wikipedia
is available for posting a favorable entry regarding
[trademarks]"!<
http://thettablog.blogspot.com/2010/12/precedential-no-43-ttab-reverses.html