User talk:EJSawyer

Precedent Barnstar

		Precedent Barnstar
		I award EJSawyer this Precedent Barnstar for serendipitously contributing text cited by administrative judges in a real-world legal dispute. In the case, In re Trek 2000 International Ltd., No. 77099785 (T.T.A.B. Nov. 30, 2010), Singapore-based Trek 2000 successfully won registration of the trademark "ThumbDrive." In 2008, a trademark examiner approved principal registration for ThumbDrive® to Trek 2000 (a supplemental registration, which confers fewer legal benefits, had been granted two years earlier). In an unusual move, the examiner subsequently requested reinstatement of jurisdiction following the period for public comment. Once granted jurisdiction, the examiner rejected the trademark as generic. That is, the examiner found that "ThumbDrive" could not be a proprietary trademark because it referred generically to USB flash drives. In an effort to traverse the rejection, Trek 2000 cited several references, including the Wikipedia article on USB flash drive. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board blockquoted this article, a practice that I find somewhat horrifying (as do other commentators). The quoted passage favored Trek 2000's position because it suggested that "ThumbDrive" was commonly understood to derive from a trademark: The myriad different brand names and terminology used, in the past and currently, make UFDs more difficult for manufacturers to market and for consumers to research. Some commonly used names are actually trademarks of particular companies, such as Cruzer, TravelDrive, ThumbDrive, and Disgo. Although the Board did not place special emphasis on the Wikipedia article, some commentators have suggested that the decision may have been a very close call. Your 2008 edit inserted the key term into the article. You added "ThumbDrive" to the list of commonly-used trademarked names. Interestingly, your edit may have false at one point—after the trademark examiner requested reinstatement of jurisdiction and refused registration. The 2010 TTAB decision, which quoted your contribution, ironically made the addition indisputably true. Your edit is so unusual that I award you this first-ever Precedent Barnstar. I trust that your edit complied with Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. As an intellectual property attorney gamely noted about the Trek 2000 decision, "Wikipedia is available for posting a favorable entry regarding [trademarks]"!
Presented by Cool Hand Luke 03:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I am honored, and more than a little surprised, by this award. I confirm that my edit complies completely with the Wikipedia conflict-of-interest policy. From my understanding of this case, I have never been employed, directly or indirectly, by any party that was involved in the dispute, nor have I ever owned stock in these companies, except perhaps as part of a mutual fund. My edit was simply made in good faith, to extend the encyclopedic scope of Wikipedia as a resource. EJSawyer (talk) 21:27, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Maximus Inc

Hi EJSawyer! Are you interested and available to review a request about updating the introduction of the Maximus Inc. Wikipedia page? The reason I am asking is that last year, you edited the page to add a new "short description" and it seemed like you were perhaps familiar with the company. I have a request on the Talk page that explains the changes I am proposing.

For transparency, I work for Maximus and have a conflict of interest, which is why I've not made the changes myself. Due to my understanding of Wikipedia's conflict of interest rules, I am using Wikipedia Talk pages to suggest edits for Maximus instead of direct editing, and this is my latest request. If you're not available, is there anyone else you think would be helpful? Thank you in advance. HSMaximus (talk) 19:56, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Done. EJSawyer (talk) 21:03, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)