On 3/3/2012 7:39 AM, biig wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/1/2012 7:01 AM, biig wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No-one has mentioned the difference between a slow cooker and a crock
>>>>>>> pot.
>>>>>>> The first heats from the bottom and the second from the sides.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's incorrect. They are all slow cookers. And while several
>>>>>> companies
>>>>>> make slow cookers with crockery lining or inserts, Crock-Pot is a
>>>>>> brand
>>>>>> name specific to Rival crockery-lined slow cookers.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm aware of that, but the generic wording crock pot is often
>>>>> used
>>>>> interchangibly with slow cooker. I know they both cook slowly, but
>>>>> there
>>>>> is a difference between the side heating and bottom heating. I've
>>>>> often
>>>>> wondered if a dish meant for a "crock pot" would be a problem done in a
>>>>> bottom heating unit....Sharon : )
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You might be correct as far as vernacular goes, like people calling all
>>>> facial tissues "Kleenex", but the manufacturers do not use the term
>>>> "Crock
>>>> Pot" unless they have paid the owner to use the registered trade mark.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Janet Wilder
>>>> Way-the-heck-south Texas
>>>> Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
>>>
>>> That's it Janet. I wasn't inferring that any other manufacturers
>>> were
>>> calling their units "crock-pots"....Sharon
>>
>> That's right, you didn't say that other manufacturers called their
>> products Crock-Pot. You said that all side-heating units were crock pots
>> and all bottom-heating units were slow cookers. There is no question about
>> what you said. You're original statement still exists.
>
> I didn't say " *all* side-heating units" That was your wording. So
> what's next. Should I stand against the wall and ask for a last cigarette? A
> lot of fuss over such a small thing. ....Sharon

And I didn't put it in quotation marks, either. You didn't have to say
"all." You separated them into two categories defined by name and mode
of function. And you got it wrong.

On 3/3/2012 7:41 AM, biig wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Fri, 2 Mar 2012 16:11:23 -0500, > wrote:
>>
>>> Perhaps I should have said "crockery-pot" That may have prevented all
>>> the fuss...Sharon
>>
>> It was much ado about nothing, Sharon. I think most people knew you
>> were talking in generalities. Who would think to say "crockery"
>> instead of crock.
>>
>> --
>> Food is an important part of a balanced diet.
>
> Thanks for that. Life is too short to get all shook up about such
> a small thing....Sharon


So we're supposed to just put a Band-Aid on it, are we?

"Pennyaline" > wrote in message
...
> On 3/3/2012 7:39 AM, biig wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/1/2012 7:01 AM, biig wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No-one has mentioned the difference between a slow cooker and a
>>>>>>>> crock
>>>>>>>> pot.
>>>>>>>> The first heats from the bottom and the second from the sides.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's incorrect. They are all slow cookers. And while several
>>>>>>> companies
>>>>>>> make slow cookers with crockery lining or inserts, Crock-Pot is a
>>>>>>> brand
>>>>>>> name specific to Rival crockery-lined slow cookers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm aware of that, but the generic wording crock pot is often
>>>>>> used
>>>>>> interchangibly with slow cooker. I know they both cook slowly, but
>>>>>> there
>>>>>> is a difference between the side heating and bottom heating. I've
>>>>>> often
>>>>>> wondered if a dish meant for a "crock pot" would be a problem done in
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> bottom heating unit....Sharon : )
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You might be correct as far as vernacular goes, like people calling
>>>>> all
>>>>> facial tissues "Kleenex", but the manufacturers do not use the term
>>>>> "Crock
>>>>> Pot" unless they have paid the owner to use the registered trade mark.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Janet Wilder
>>>>> Way-the-heck-south Texas
>>>>> Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
>>>>
>>>> That's it Janet. I wasn't inferring that any other manufacturers
>>>> were
>>>> calling their units "crock-pots"....Sharon
>>>
>>> That's right, you didn't say that other manufacturers called their
>>> products Crock-Pot. You said that all side-heating units were crock pots
>>> and all bottom-heating units were slow cookers. There is no question
>>> about
>>> what you said. You're original statement still exists.
>>
>> I didn't say " *all* side-heating units" That was your wording. So
>> what's next. Should I stand against the wall and ask for a last
>> cigarette? A
>> lot of fuss over such a small thing. ....Sharon
>
> And I didn't put it in quotation marks, either. You didn't have to say
> "all." You separated them into two categories defined by name and mode of
> function. And you got it wrong.

Whatever...

"Pennyaline" > wrote in message
...
> On 3/3/2012 7:41 AM, biig wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Fri, 2 Mar 2012 16:11:23 -0500, > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Perhaps I should have said "crockery-pot" That may have prevented all
>>>> the fuss...Sharon
>>>
>>> It was much ado about nothing, Sharon. I think most people knew you
>>> were talking in generalities. Who would think to say "crockery"
>>> instead of crock.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Food is an important part of a balanced diet.
>>
>> Thanks for that. Life is too short to get all shook up about
>> such
>> a small thing....Sharon
>
>
> So we're supposed to just put a Band-Aid on it, are we?

< Chuckle > ....I've already spent more time on this subject than it's
worth....

On 3/3/2012 9:05 AM, biig wrote:

> Whatever...

The answer to all of life's problems, ultimately.

"biig" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Pennyaline" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 3/3/2012 7:39 AM, biig wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/1/2012 7:01 AM, biig wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No-one has mentioned the difference between a slow cooker and a
>>>>>>>>> crock
>>>>>>>>> pot.
>>>>>>>>> The first heats from the bottom and the second from the sides.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's incorrect. They are all slow cookers. And while several
>>>>>>>> companies
>>>>>>>> make slow cookers with crockery lining or inserts, Crock-Pot is a
>>>>>>>> brand
>>>>>>>> name specific to Rival crockery-lined slow cookers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm aware of that, but the generic wording crock pot is
>>>>>>> often
>>>>>>> used
>>>>>>> interchangibly with slow cooker. I know they both cook slowly, but
>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>> is a difference between the side heating and bottom heating. I've
>>>>>>> often
>>>>>>> wondered if a dish meant for a "crock pot" would be a problem done
>>>>>>> in a
>>>>>>> bottom heating unit....Sharon : )
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You might be correct as far as vernacular goes, like people calling
>>>>>> all
>>>>>> facial tissues "Kleenex", but the manufacturers do not use the term
>>>>>> "Crock
>>>>>> Pot" unless they have paid the owner to use the registered trade
>>>>>> mark.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Janet Wilder
>>>>>> Way-the-heck-south Texas
>>>>>> Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's it Janet. I wasn't inferring that any other manufacturers
>>>>> were
>>>>> calling their units "crock-pots"....Sharon
>>>>
>>>> That's right, you didn't say that other manufacturers called their
>>>> products Crock-Pot. You said that all side-heating units were crock
>>>> pots
>>>> and all bottom-heating units were slow cookers. There is no question
>>>> about
>>>> what you said. You're original statement still exists.
>>>
>>> I didn't say " *all* side-heating units" That was your wording.
>>> So
>>> what's next. Should I stand against the wall and ask for a last
>>> cigarette? A
>>> lot of fuss over such a small thing. ....Sharon
>>
>> And I didn't put it in quotation marks, either. You didn't have to say
>> "all." You separated them into two categories defined by name and mode of
>> function. And you got it wrong.
>
> Whatever...

Yep that is you now for flogging and probably hanging! That'll teach ya )

--
http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

"Pennyaline" > wrote in message
...
> On 3/3/2012 9:05 AM, biig wrote:
>
>> Whatever...
>
> The answer to all of life's problems, ultimately.

Hey Little Miss Perfect ... how is it in perfection alley these days?


--
http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 07:28:47 -0600 in rec.food.cooking, Michel Boucher
> wrote,
>David Harmon > wrote in
:
>
>> Rival no longer produces the useful quality product that they
>> dubbed Crock-Pot, so I don't really think they are entitled to
>> complain if others have taken over the crock pot designation.
>> If Rival doesn't like it, let them post their protest in reply
>> to this message.
>
>Crock-Pot is a registered trademark.

Tough shit. I will use it the way I want. You are not the trademark
holder, so your complaint doesn't count. Let Rival send me a
cease-and-desist if they want to.

>So is Aspirin. So is Coke.
>Companies other than Bayer cannot claim they also sell Aspirin,

Wrong. The Aspirin trademark was taken away from Bayer as punishment
for supporting the Nazis in WWII. Most aspirin is made and sold by
other companies. The Crock-Pot trademark should be taken away from
Rival for selling crap.

Oh, and if people in the South want to use "coke" as a generic term for
soft drinks because Coca-Cola no longer contains cocaine, that's OK with
me.

"Ophelia" > wrote in message
...
>
> "biig" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Pennyaline" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 3/3/2012 7:39 AM, biig wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 3/1/2012 7:01 AM, biig wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No-one has mentioned the difference between a slow cooker and a
>>>>>>>>>> crock
>>>>>>>>>> pot.
>>>>>>>>>> The first heats from the bottom and the second from the sides.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's incorrect. They are all slow cookers. And while several
>>>>>>>>> companies
>>>>>>>>> make slow cookers with crockery lining or inserts, Crock-Pot is a
>>>>>>>>> brand
>>>>>>>>> name specific to Rival crockery-lined slow cookers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm aware of that, but the generic wording crock pot is
>>>>>>>> often
>>>>>>>> used
>>>>>>>> interchangibly with slow cooker. I know they both cook slowly,
>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>> is a difference between the side heating and bottom heating. I've
>>>>>>>> often
>>>>>>>> wondered if a dish meant for a "crock pot" would be a problem done
>>>>>>>> in a
>>>>>>>> bottom heating unit....Sharon : )
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You might be correct as far as vernacular goes, like people calling
>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>> facial tissues "Kleenex", but the manufacturers do not use the term
>>>>>>> "Crock
>>>>>>> Pot" unless they have paid the owner to use the registered trade
>>>>>>> mark.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Janet Wilder
>>>>>>> Way-the-heck-south Texas
>>>>>>> Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's it Janet. I wasn't inferring that any other
>>>>>> manufacturers
>>>>>> were
>>>>>> calling their units "crock-pots"....Sharon
>>>>>
>>>>> That's right, you didn't say that other manufacturers called their
>>>>> products Crock-Pot. You said that all side-heating units were crock
>>>>> pots
>>>>> and all bottom-heating units were slow cookers. There is no question
>>>>> about
>>>>> what you said. You're original statement still exists.
>>>>
>>>> I didn't say " *all* side-heating units" That was your wording.
>>>> So
>>>> what's next. Should I stand against the wall and ask for a last
>>>> cigarette? A
>>>> lot of fuss over such a small thing. ....Sharon
>>>
>>> And I didn't put it in quotation marks, either. You didn't have to say
>>> "all." You separated them into two categories defined by name and mode
>>> of function. And you got it wrong.
>>
>> Whatever...
>
> Yep that is you now for flogging and probably hanging! That'll teach ya
> )
>
> --
> http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/
Since I'm not a smoker I want a big bowl of baked mac and cheese for my
last meal....lots of buttered crumbs on top, please...lol

"biig" > wrote in message
...

>> Yep that is you now for flogging and probably hanging! That'll teach ya
>> )
>>
> Since I'm not a smoker I want a big bowl of baked mac and cheese for my
> last meal....lots of buttered crumbs on top, please...lol

good I am very pleased you don't smoke. You wouldn't want to damage your
health before your last meal now would you?

--
http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

"Ophelia" > wrote in message
...
>
> "biig" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>> Yep that is you now for flogging and probably hanging! That'll teach ya
>>> )
>>>
>> Since I'm not a smoker I want a big bowl of baked mac and cheese for
>> my last meal....lots of buttered crumbs on top, please...lol
>
> good I am very pleased you don't smoke. You wouldn't want to damage your
> health before your last meal now would you?
>
> --
> http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/
Laugh!!

On 3/3/2012 9:37 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>
> "Pennyaline" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 3/3/2012 9:05 AM, biig wrote:
>>
>>> Whatever...
>>
>> The answer to all of life's problems, ultimately.
>
> Hey Little Miss Perfect ... how is it in perfection alley these days?


I beg your pardon? What was it about that light-hearted answer that went
up your nose? You must be in flames about the Band-Aid reference in one
of my responses to her (even though she thought it was funny, as it was
meant to be). Take a chill pill, honey--no particular brand.

On 3/3/2012 10:10 AM, biig wrote:
> Since I'm not a smoker I want a big bowl of baked mac and cheese for my
> last meal....lots of buttered crumbs on top, please...lol

I make it with potato chips on top. You'll have to take what you get.

On 3/3/2012 10:02 AM, David Harmon wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 07:28:47 -0600 in rec.food.cooking, Michel Boucher
> > wrote,

>> Crock-Pot is a registered trademark.
>
> Tough shit. I will use it the way I want. You are not the trademark
> holder, so your complaint doesn't count. Let Rival send me a
> cease-and-desist if they want to.
>
>> So is Aspirin. So is Coke.
>> Companies other than Bayer cannot claim they also sell Aspirin,
>
> Wrong. The Aspirin trademark was taken away from Bayer as punishment
> for supporting the Nazis in WWII. Most aspirin is made and sold by
> other companies. The Crock-Pot trademark should be taken away from
> Rival for selling crap.

It's more complicated, yet far simpler, than that. Bayer actually
started to lose the rights to Aspirin during WWI.



> Oh, and if people in the South want to use "coke" as a generic term for
> soft drinks because Coca-Cola no longer contains cocaine, that's OK with
> me.

If that was the only criterion, they'd have to stop calling it Coca-Cola
as well.

"Pennyaline" > wrote in message
...
> On 3/3/2012 9:37 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>
>> "Pennyaline" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 3/3/2012 9:05 AM, biig wrote:
>>>
>>>> Whatever...
>>>
>>> The answer to all of life's problems, ultimately.
>>
>> Hey Little Miss Perfect ... how is it in perfection alley these days?
>
>
> I beg your pardon? What was it about that light-hearted answer that went
> up your nose? You must be in flames about the Band-Aid reference in one of
> my responses to her (even though she thought it was funny, as it was meant
> to be). Take a chill pill, honey--no particular brand.

In which case, apols


--
http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

David Harmon > wrote in
news
>>Crock-Pot is a registered trademark.
>
> Tough shit. I will use it the way I want. You are not the
> trademark holder, so your complaint doesn't count. Let Rival
> send me a cease-and-desist if they want to.
>
>>So is Aspirin. So is Coke.
>>Companies other than Bayer cannot claim they also sell
>>Aspirin,
>
> Wrong. The Aspirin trademark was taken away from Bayer as
> punishment for supporting the Nazis in WWII. Most aspirin is
> made and sold by other companies. The Crock-Pot trademark
> should be taken away from Rival for selling crap.
>
> Oh, and if people in the South want to use "coke" as a generic
> term for soft drinks because Coca-Cola no longer contains
> cocaine, that's OK with me.

Are you twelve? Because your arguments are those of a twelve-
year old.

--

If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn’t
help the poor, either we’ve got to pretend that Jesus
was just as selfish as we are, or we’ve got to acknowledge
that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy
without condition, and then admit that we just don’t
want to do it.

Stephen Colbert (via videcormeum)

David Harmon > wrote in
news
> Wrong. The Aspirin trademark was taken away from Bayer as
> punishment for supporting the Nazis in WWII.

It was WWI, and only supported only by France, Russia, the United
Kingdom, and the United States. Basically, it was industrial
theft.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirin#Trademark

> Most aspirin is
> made and sold by other companies.

Not in Germany, Canada, Mexico and **80** other countries where it
is still a registered trademark. I live in Canada, so my comment
was true. No other company can sell "aspirin" in Canada.

--

If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn’t
help the poor, either we’ve got to pretend that Jesus
was just as selfish as we are, or we’ve got to acknowledge
that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy
without condition, and then admit that we just don’t
want to do it.

Stephen Colbert (via videcormeum)

On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 09:02:33 -0800, David Harmon >
wrote:

>On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 07:28:47 -0600 in rec.food.cooking, Michel Boucher
> wrote,
>>David Harmon > wrote in
:
>>
>>> Rival no longer produces the useful quality product that they
>>> dubbed Crock-Pot, so I don't really think they are entitled to
>>> complain if others have taken over the crock pot designation.
>>> If Rival doesn't like it, let them post their protest in reply
>>> to this message.
>>
>>Crock-Pot is a registered trademark.
>
>Tough shit. I will use it the way I want. You are not the trademark
>holder, so your complaint doesn't count. Let Rival send me a
>cease-and-desist if they want to.

CROCK-POT, Skinny Crock-Pot, and "Crock-Pot The Orginal Slow Cooker" are
live trademarks of Sunbeam Products for commercial use in prepared foods
and electric cooking appliances.


>
>>So is Aspirin. So is Coke.
>>Companies other than Bayer cannot claim they also sell Aspirin,
>
>Wrong. The Aspirin trademark was taken away from Bayer as punishment
>for supporting the Nazis in WWII. Most aspirin is made and sold by
>other companies. The Crock-Pot trademark should be taken away from
>Rival for selling crap.
>
>Oh, and if people in the South want to use "coke" as a generic term for
>soft drinks because Coca-Cola no longer contains cocaine, that's OK with
>me.

Coke is an live trademark owned by the Coca-Cola Company for use with
soft drinks. You can use it how you wish, but its commercial and
published use as related to soft drinks is restricted. Using it as a
contraction of cocaine is not restricted.