Imagination exercise for teachers:
Imagine for a second a wonderfully creative student project sitting on your desk. You've run the rubric. You've got a grade in mind. You've looked at all the project requirements to make sure the student fulfilled your expectations. And you're about to add the magic number/grade to the big green book, maybe even add a summary paragraph to the grading sheet to tell the student just how impressed you are with his/her work.
Just before you begin to shift to another project, you find yourself compelled to add one magic touch. The ubiquitous smiley face. A big'ol smiley face at the top of the page, letting your student know just how impressed you are.
And then the good folks of Walmart rush in the door, grab your red pen, confiscate the grading sheet and the big green book, and warn you never, never ever ever, neeeeeeever to use their trademarked Smiley Face again without expressed written permission (and a small copyright fee).
A Frenchman who claims to have invented the yellow smiley face back in 1968 is opposing the US retail giant's move.
For some, the image is a reminder of 1970s counter-culture, for others, a useful shorthand when sending e-mails.
But since 1996, Wal-Mart has used the image in the US on uniforms and promotional signs, and it wants sole rights to it in the US retail sector.
Could it happen? And could Wal-Mart perhaps being rolling the irony-dice a bit too hard with regards to the underlying message a smiley face means and the decision to 'own' it and thus keep others for using it? Just maybe?
*****
Yet another reason NOT to shop at Walmart!
Posted by: Tod | May 12, 2006 at 12:23 AM
:-(
Posted by: Karyn Romeis | May 12, 2006 at 04:19 AM
To me, this symbol says "Wal-Mart employes are on drugs". Do you want some ecstasy with those baked beans? Acid house Summer of Love 1989. Wikipedia claims the symbol 'fell into the public domain' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smiley
.. but educators aren't in the retail sector, or are we?) Interesting post, what happens when people try to claim ownership of images that belong to everyone? cheers, michael
Posted by: michael chalk | May 13, 2006 at 09:03 PM