More on TechnologyTell: Gadget News | Apple News
Why is the ePub logo contest taking forever to happen? And what about the all-caps issue?
September 22, 2009 | 7:18 am
|
By David Rothman
Just how will it take the International Digital Publishing Forum to crank up the promised ePub logo contest? Back in May 2009, the word was: In a few weeks.
The logo suggestions you’re seeing, from Travis Alber (left), Steve Jordan (right) and Actua Litte (below), are not official.
But why should we care? Well, Amazon so far refuses to let the Kindle render ePub natively. It’s been trying to hog the scene with its proprietary Kindle standard. For the rest of the world to compete, a logo for the IPDF ePub standard will help immensely. We’re talking about people’s livelihoods, in areas ranging from software to e-book retailing.
I’ve heard talk in the past about trademark complexities—is that still a reason for the delay, or could the IDPF simply use more people to handle matters like the logo contest? Time for publishers to be less miserly toward the group?
An “EPUB” trademark already exists in the U.S., the filing having been made on September 19, 2008, by Erica Lazzaro of OverDrive, acting on behalf of the IDPF—headed by her employer, OverDrive’s CEO Steve Potash. So what’s cooking with other countries? Can the Madrid system or European Community Trademark System expedite the trademark process elsewhere? At any rate, I think we’re owed a meaningful answer about whether trademark is still a reason for the delay, and if so, just why? Any complications? I’ll contact Ms. Lazzaro and IDPF Executive Director Mike Smith to see if they can enlighten us about the trademark situation and the reasons in general for the delayed contest.
ePub, please—not an ugly ALL-CAPS approach
The other issue is whether the IDPF should modify the EPUB trademark or take other actions to expressedly provide for the use of the mixed-case ePub for marketing purposes rather than the all-caps EPUB. If it’s a matter of “either or” in the trademark, perhaps it can be modified in favor of ePub.
Only a geek can love EPUB in print. Alas, the IDPF must also compete for the attention of English majors, especially at large publishers. I could tolerate all caps on the logo. But at this point it isn’t my preference. ePub or ePUB would look better on the actual logo, not just in print or in online articles.
What’s more, the issues go beyond aesthetics. Mike Cane correctly writes that “rubes will think it’s pronounced ‘EP-ub.’ Marketing 101 FAIL.” Exactly. If the IDPF techies want, they can keep EPUB for internal purpose and for technical discussions, but the marketing ideally will happen with “ePub” as the preferred usage.
Of course, the bottom line is whether to have an e-book standard, period. A less-than-perfectly promoted one is far, far better than none at all. Meanwhile, below, without a precise layout used, I’ll reproduce the trademark info from the U.S, Patent and Trademark Office site. You can search for the entry yourself (the URLs apparently aren’t permanent).
EPUB
Word Mark
EPUB
Goods and Services
IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Computer services in the nature of a XML based electronic file format standard for creating electronic books and other digital publications composed of the Open Publication Structure, Open Packaging Format and Open Container Format. FIRST USE
IN COMMERECE: 20060910.
Standard Characters
Claimed
Mark Drawing Code (4)
STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number
77574103
Filing Date
September 19, 2008
Current Filing Basis
1A.
[According to an unofficial explanation, that would mean already “Using the mark in commerce on or in connection with the identified goods and/or services”---as opposed to 1B or “intent to use as of the filing date of the application.”]
Original Filing Basis
1A
Owner
(APPLICANT) Open eBook Forum DBA International Digital Publishing Forum non-profit corporation D.C. 244 Fifth Avenue #2347 New York NEW YORK 10001
Attorney of Record
Erica Lazzaro
Type of Mark
TRADEMARK
Register
PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator
LIVE
|
Previous
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS
Comments:
There was an “all-caps” issue on this? This always seemed to me to be a localized aesthetics matter, important only to geeks… like saying “sci-fi” as opposed to “SF” or “science fiction.” In both cases, the rest of the world really couldn’t care less, it seems.
Personally, I don’t have an issue using all-caps in designating most acronyms, since it avoids confusing characters (the number one, the uppercase “I” and the lowercase “L,” for example)… though obviously this isn’t an issue for ePub (it could be if they go with the name “OEB”). On the other hand, if the world wants to go lowercase, that’s fine, too… as long as those acronyms avoid confusion, which is what is important.
I’d just like to point out (as I have in other posts) that I think we should be referring to the format’s name, Open E-Book (OEB), rather than the file extension (epub), to be more consistent with other formats’ naming conventions… Adobe Acrobat/Reader is about the only other file format that is perhaps better known for its file extension (pdf) than its name.
Heck, Steve, nontechies do care. Caps seem to shout. As I see it, this is indeed a matter of aesthetics.
Now—about OEB vs. ePub. It is much less confusing to nontechies to make the format name and the extension name the same.
Hey, regardless of our differences, thanks for speaking up.
Meanwhile I’ve emailed Erica and Mike for their thoughts on the issue in the post.
Thanks,
David
Another thing to think about is that “ePub” rolls off the tongue better than “OEB” as well. It is just easier to say in conversation as in “just get the ePub” vs “just get the OEB”.
The original version of the blue logo is here: http://threepress.org/epub/logos
I put it into the public domain. There are various formats available, including scalable versions.
Thanks, Liza. Ouch. Sorry not to have mentioned you by name.
David
@David, re OEB vs ePub: Keep in mind that many computers are set (often by default) not to display extensions… in many cases, non-techies have no idea what the extensions of their most-used programs are (take it from me, I see it all the time). And in any event, they shouldn’t have to care. If the docs are described on a website, and on their computers/devices, as OEB, they’ll know what to buy and use (just as the do when they are described on a website, and on their devices, by the extension, of course). My main point is that naming it by the name, and not the extension, is more consistent with other formats.
On the caps thing: Sure, words and sentences in all-caps SHOUT. A 3-letter acronym? Not so much. But capitalizing them helps to make sure they don’t get confused as odd short words. Anyway, as I said, as long as they don’t get confused with something else, what the hey…
@Mark: Maybe people would start referring to OEB files as “Weeb”s… that’s easy to say…
I’d e-mailed Mike S. when I introduced my logo design here, hoping for a comment pro or con. I got crickets. Hope you get a better response.
But Steve, ePub is already more commonly used on pub domain and bookstore sites than “OEB.”
Re three-letter and caps: Hey, as noted above, I’ll stick with “ePub: since people already know about it than know about OEB.
> I’d e-mailed Mike S. when I introduced my logo design here, hoping for a comment pro or con. I got crickets. Hope you get a better response.
Hello, Mike? If you’re reading this, please answer Steve. Although he and I disagree, he deserves at least a nice acknowledgment.
Thanks,
David
[moustache_twirl]A problem that can be easily rectified…[/moustache_twirl]
Yes, Mike… give us a shout, or we’re gonna start calling your e-book format “Weeb” from now on! Hah!
Good news. Mike Smith at the IDPF will be responding in the next day or so. Meanwhile if possible, please hold off on comments about the contest delay and ePub vs. EPUB. Let’s see what he has to say.
Thanks,
David