I think I invented it with some others in the mid-90s in AOL chatrooms. We got into a Monty Python quote contest and, of course, we ended up with the spam skit. It got out of hand and all people ended up doing was making implausibly long spam-spam-and-eggs derivations or scrolling S-P-A-M across multiple lines. It was a fun inside joke for a while, but some other people came in and took it over and kept it going for days. It stopped being funny. Eventually people got tired and kept saying "stop spamming" and the use of "spam" for obnoxious in-your-face behavior took off from there.

It's all my fault. I publically apologized a few years ago on Milt Rosenberg's radio show. Okay, maybe it was coined before us, but that's a true story.

__________________
"What you think you thought you saw you did not see." Agent J, MiB - Manhatten Bureau

I'm honored, though doing a little textual archaeology I find that when the term first came into general use in forums that Google groups archive (around May 1994) it was usually explained as coming from the Monty python skit either directly or via the MUD coding community.

And to avoid accusations of thread hijacking let me say that the OP seemed like an OK poster to me until he became obsessed with large diamonds. I suggest a holiday.

Actually, we used to do it on BBSs in the 80's, literally by typing (or hot-keying) "SPAM" with a carriage return on an obviously out-to-lunch post.

I didn't invent it, though. I first saw it used in 1986 to squash other posts. Pretty effective when the other users' modems were only at 300 BAUD. Saw it again, later, on usenet a year or two later.

Spamming was heavily frowned on DARPANET, though... I lost logon privelages for three days once. Not fun when you have a project to complete and need access to the databases for your information!

I remember in 1985/6 when the first Spam ads started coming out for a law firm doing immigration work.

__________________
Forming opinions as we speak

The infamous Canter and Siegel.

__________________
And you, to whom adversity has dealt the final blow
With smiling [faces] lyin' to ye' everywhere ye' go
Turn to, and put out all your strength of arm and heart and brain
And like the Mary Ellen Carter, rise again.

Spam should be spelled Spam, not SPAM.

I'm not kidding. SPAM™ is a registered trademark of Hormel Foods, LLC.

__________________
smile, and the Universe smiles with you

I wouldn't capitalize it at all, since that would also imply the proper noun rather than the common one. Spam spelled spam.

Canter and Spiegel was 1994.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

__________________
‘To those who regard “crime fiction” as some sacred icon which must follow a rigid formula, I will always be the man who writes 18-syllable haiku.’Trying to make sense of computers, The Error Log.

For those of you not familiar with the famous Monty Python Sketch, there is a copy on YouTube here

The food product referred to was actually called Spiced Pork and Ham, which got shortened to spam, and it is still made to this day.

I actually quite like it.

An official advert for SPAM from the UK

__________________
Moderations in purple

Fame, glory, adventure, a cyber warrior craves not these things.

To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄ Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄ Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

Hawaii has the highest consumption of SPAM per person.

I just had to mention that, although it really doesn't have anything to do with the OP or AOL chatrooms.

__________________
"I'm as accurate as any psychic. And I'm a cartoon!" -- Squidward

"Arrrgh, the laws of physics be a harsh mistress!" -- Bender

Oddly enough, you can't go into a chatoom anymore without running into bot-spam.

__________________
"What you think you thought you saw you did not see." Agent J, MiB - Manhatten Bureau

The term SPAM did originate from Monty Python's skit, and references an overabundance of something unwanted, as per the skit, as well as the SPAM™ mentioned countless times throughout.

Thus, the all-caps.

Actually, I thought the all caps was due to the logo, which is trademarked by Hormel Foods. I think Robinson was saying we shouldn't use the trademarked name for some reason.

__________________
"What you think you thought you saw you did not see." Agent J, MiB - Manhatten Bureau

Hormel does not object to the term, but insists that it be spelled in lower case so as to distinguish it from its capitalized SPAM™ trademark. Hormel objects to Spam's "product identity" (for example, images of SPAM™ cans) being used in relation to spamming, and has filed lawsuits against companies which have attempted to trademark words containing "Spam".

__________________
smile, and the Universe smiles with you

I'm not surprised. It goes well with fried pineapple.

This thread is making me hungry for some, but I have a chicken leg all defrosted for my tea

Plus living alone a can of spam is too big for little old me

__________________
Moderations in purple

Fame, glory, adventure, a cyber warrior craves not these things.

To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄ Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄ Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

Sticks, I have a small can of SPAM, which I bought at an asian market here.

I always thought the meaning of spam included the aspect of mass-messaging.

You could try the competitor, TREAT. It's not as good, but that means you won't bemoan throwing the remainder away.

__________________
"What you think you thought you saw you did not see." Agent J, MiB - Manhatten Bureau

Penelo..., er, Robinson, I'm sure public discussion does not meet any legal requirement to be considered as patent infringement. Courts have repetitively ruled it's within my rights, as an adult, to take pictures of anything, and write or copy anything (within the bounds of decency, of course), and silk-screen it to a t-shirt, then wear it anywhere I please.

Provided I'm not selling them. Free speech. Thus, my writing the term SPAM, in all-caps, violates nothing, except, perhaps, Hormel's unenforceable wishes that I use lower-case.

Especially since it's their trademark, not their patent, that's involved here.

The reason, Mugs, that Hormel is acting to prevent folks from misusing its trademark "SPAM" is the very real fact that companies lose trademarks when it becomes part of the language.

Google is in very real danger of losing its trademark, because dictionaries accepted "to google" as an English verb.

So yeah, you can say 'legos' instead of LEGO bricks all you like, and the company probably can't do anything concrete to stop you, but the more people who do this, and the less they object to it, then the more likely it is that someone will successfully challenge their trademark.

Hormel is well within its rights to defend its trademarks. They don't object to defining 'to spam' to refer to advertising abuse, as long as we're careful not to misuse its logo, pics of its product, and especially to be careful to use the all-caps SPAM to only refer to the pink luncheon meat.

The anti-spam community (meaning NANA* and groups in that tradition) have never had a problem with Hormel's request. Neither should you. Hormel's gone over and above to be reasonable about it. Fair's fair.

__________________
And you, to whom adversity has dealt the final blow
With smiling [faces] lyin' to ye' everywhere ye' go
Turn to, and put out all your strength of arm and heart and brain
And like the Mary Ellen Carter, rise again.

Good catch, Moose. My bad.

Tough. If I want to say, or write, "SPAM," and I'm doing so in non-profit, non-libelous manner expressing my opinion of something, there's nothing Hormel can do about it, except, perhaps, SPAM me.

What's the best form of flattery, again?

My use of the term LEGO does not infringe on their trademark, which is the legal right to use that coined word in commerce.

Trademark rights are limited rights. They are by no means absolute. They are subject to fair use under the 1st Amendment. The right is limited to the right to prevent confusion, particularly by competitors. Thus, LEGO is protected against a competing building block company from using LET-GO blocks. Put simply, "a trademark owner has a property right only insofar as is necessary to prevent customer confusion as to who produced the goods and to facilitate differentiation of the trademark owner's goods."

Since e-mail will never be confused with canned ham, using the term SPAM (all-caps and all) embodies no trademark violation whatsoeveragainst Hormel's SPAM^TM meat product.

On the other hand, if I were in the fertilizer market and decided to advertise my product by saying, "Think of it as spam for your garden - your fruits and veggies will love it!", then it doesn't matter whether I've used all-caps or not, as I've intimated that my fertilizer is food, and with the same four-letter word as the canned meat. Thus, it's a trademark violation.

Additionally, due to my associating it with something generally thought of as repulsive (fertilizer), I would have opened myself up to a lawsuit for libel, as well.

You, Hormel, and others need to become more familiar with the law before you start telling me or anyone else whether or not we can use the term SPAM, regardless of whether it's talking about the canned variety, or the SPAM I receive in my inbox.

Thank you.

PS: U.S. Supreme Court Justice O'Conner: "The law of unfair competition has its roots in the common-law tort of deceit: its general concern is with protecting consumers from confusion as to source. While that concern may result in the creation of “quasi-property rights” in communicative symbols, the focus is on the protection of consumers, not the protection of producers as an incentive to product innovation."

Another court opined: "A “trademark” is not that which is infringed. What is infringed is the right of the public to be free of confusion and the synonymous right of a trademark owner to control his product’s reputation. … The trademark laws exist not to “protect” trademarks, but, as above indicated, to protect the consuming public from confusion, concomitantly protecting the trademark owner’s right to a non-confused public."

That little bit of snark might be less underwhelming had it not been on the heels of that little patent law/trademark law misidentification above, Mugs.

And yet, Hormel gets its legal advice from real lawyers. Certified under a bar association even.

__________________
And you, to whom adversity has dealt the final blow
With smiling [faces] lyin' to ye' everywhere ye' go
Turn to, and put out all your strength of arm and heart and brain
And like the Mary Ellen Carter, rise again.

Was that the one where I good-naturedly, and quite honestly remarked, "Good catch, Moose. My bad?"

I'll let you pick out which logical fallacy you just heinously committed, Moose. Hint: It's initials are AF.

As for "snarky," what do you call use of terminology such as "that little?" Soothing?

Well, aside from the fact that this logically fallacious arguement is an appeal to authority, those lawyers are working for and paid by Hormel, no doubt. (yawn) As such, they're neither an objective or credible source.

By comparison, the source I provided, U.S. Supreme Court Justice O'Conner, carries a *tad* more weight.

Just a smidgen...

Protesting your rude behavior isn't a logical fallacy.

No. Descriptive. Had your snark been more serious, I would have used the report button. As it stands, a verbal protest is sufficient.

Actually, no, it's protest of your appeal to misplaced authority: your own alleged, unsupported expertise.

Which, your not having properly cited your quotes, is thus presented utterly out of context and is thus useless to me. I'll be glad to consider O'Conner's opinion once I can examine it in the context it was written.

Until then, my protests at your tone remain.

__________________
And you, to whom adversity has dealt the final blow
With smiling [faces] lyin' to ye' everywhere ye' go
Turn to, and put out all your strength of arm and heart and brain
And like the Mary Ellen Carter, rise again.

Really? For some reason I thought it was open to civil litigation. I'm not sure why, I just seem to vaguely recall it being so.

__________________
"What you think you thought you saw you did not see." Agent J, MiB - Manhatten Bureau

Could this be what you're remembering, AP?

I didn't find a convenient link to the outcome, but unless I'm severely misremembering, the judge ruled the t-shirts were bannable as well.

__________________
And you, to whom adversity has dealt the final blow
With smiling [faces] lyin' to ye' everywhere ye' go
Turn to, and put out all your strength of arm and heart and brain
And like the Mary Ellen Carter, rise again.

I'm not thinking of that specific instance, but it's just something I seem to recall from something we may have thought about doing when I was in college, but then that would probably fall more directly under Trademark Dilution than an individual doing it. Or maybe I'm thinking more along the lines of Copyright infringement. I think that some trademarks, being graphic art, might be protected under copyright if the print is a direct reproduction of the image.

__________________
"What you think you thought you saw you did not see." Agent J, MiB - Manhatten Bureau

__________________
Moderations in purple

Fame, glory, adventure, a cyber warrior craves not these things.

To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄ Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄ Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►