Talk:Pantone

message: The text says "$90,000 (equivalent to $5,740,000 in 2017)". I think, it should be more like "740,000 in 2017", the number "5" seems to be a mistake.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.243.151.147 (talk) 10:34, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Dollar equivalent

message: Speaking as a representative of the average Wikipedia user, I'd like to ask that you guys take your intellectual property policy activism dust up out back in the alley. Most of the readers of Wikipedia don't care about this crap, and we just want information. If you want to qualify it in some way with a link to another article, go ahead, but please don't censor information. Every single claim of intellectual property rights turns into a big edit fight. It's as though every date of an event that is mention in a Wikipedia article turned into a dispute and big discussion of the Gregorian calendar and the addition of microseconds to the calendar and such. We don't care. 123.218.200.241 (talk) 04:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Please avoid intellectual property activism here

message: I would like more information about the influence of Pantone on the fashion industry. I have heard that due to the utility of defined colors across suppliers, the colors that become predominant in a year's fashion are by default among those that Pantone adds to its catalog annually.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.229.135.3 (talk) 21:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: Twice, the following information has been removed "Pantone's list of color numbers and values is the intellectual property of Pantone and free use of the list is not allowed. This is why Pantone colors cannot be supported in Open Source software such as GNU Image Manipulation Program (GIMP) and are not often found in low-cost software. (This protection is based on copyright and trademark law, not as is sometimes stated software patents)."
This information is extremely important to open source developers and others, and is supported in the article by a reference. I don't want to get into a revert war, but if User:taw insists on deleting without discussion I'm not sure how to proceed.
The statements (1) are verifiably made by Pantone and (2) have an impact, as per the reference. If there is a verifiable source which challenges this, this is very important both to developers and to Pantone and their shareholders (since their entire business model depends on protecting their intellectual property). 
In the mean time I am restoring the text with the addition of "Pantone assert that". Notinasnaid 09:41, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is why Pantone colors cannot be supported in Open Source software such as GNU Image Manipulation Program (GIMP) and are not often found in low-cost software. (This protection is based on copyright and trademark law, not as is sometimes stated software patents).
The "protection" doesn't seem to be based on anything legal, and in particular there doesn't seem to be anything in either the copyright or trademark law to support their claims.
Moreover, just because they claim to have some vague kind of "intellectual property" over the system does not affect the Open Source software in any way, unless one chooses to believe them. Don't present it as some kind of a legal fact. Taw 09:55, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok, I'm all for pedantry, but why not discuss it first. How about this: This is frequently held as a reason why Pantone colors cannot be supported in Open Source software such as GNU Image Manipulation Program (GIMP) and are not often found in low-cost software. It has been claimed that "it seems as if the company is being intentionally unclear" but it is acknowledged that "the simplest claim would be trademark misappropriation or dilution towards someone who produced a color palette marketed as compatible with Pantone's". Notinasnaid 10:08, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I am quoting a source. I am not an IP lawyer. Are you saying that the source is too unreliable to quote? They seem to have done considerable research on the subject, and draw themselves on other sources. If you can find a counter-source of similar reliability that says this is all nonsense, of course we should quote that too. Or am I introducing systematic bias through overly selective quoting? What I am sure is that the threat of legal action, whether or not it has a legal basis, has a real effect, and this real effect and the reasons for it should be properly discussed, whatever one's personal views. Your comments, as they stand, look like original research. Notinasnaid 09:33, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok, in the absence of replies, I am putting those two sentences back. Notinasnaid 09:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of crucial information 

message: How did Herbert found AND acquire the company? 218.102.218.126 03:12, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  herbert 

message: I removed this sentence: "This effectively creates a loophole that allows software such as GIMP to use the palette."  This sounds speculative to me, unless Pantone have acknowledged it, some may disagree. If there is a reliable source which states "This effectively creates a loophole that allows software such as GIMP to use the palette." then we can and should quote the source, in context. But if this is personal interpretation, it has to stay out, sorry. (If it does go back in, it would also be good to understand how such a loophole could be exploited, I don't understand that.)Notinasnaid 08:31, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed a sentence 

message: I removed the following text: In various discussions on this subject, the concensus on the so-called 'intellectual property rights' asserted by Pantone Inc. only apply to a product claiming to be Pantone-compliant (or certified by Pantone), or when a product uses Pantone-trademarked name on a colour.
But on the other hand, this doesn't seem to add any information. What does this exclude? Only shipping an anonymous' palette with colors matching Pantone, so far as I can see. But http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/10/25/153221 says "So marketing your own full-blown replacement for Pantone Matching is out of the question, and shipping a palette of colors clearly mimicking the Pantone color swatches puts you at risk for a lawsuit." This doesn't seem to match the claimed consensus (indeed, not sure that an article that represents a consensus).
Both of these are valuable links, and could be added to the article (is there a way to link straight to the Pantone discussion?). What I am concerned about is that they are presented in a way which reveals a point of view ("so called" is not very neutral in tone, though such things can be fixed), and which doesn't seem to even reflect the article text. 
Notinasnaid 08:27, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: it turns out that one of the links simply duplicated the link used to source the other quotes (and cited). I have added the other link to External Links. Notinasnaid 08:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed text 

message: One question isn’t answered by the article: Are Pantone colors defined such that they could be expressed in the CIE color space, or does the whole absorption spectrum define the colors such that the colors look different in different surroundings? In other words: Is there a standard light source defined which is to be used for being able to see the standard color how it really is supposed to look like? Greetings --Quilbert (talk) 22:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As I under stand if from this Color FAQ they cannot be translated to CIE because they're proprietary. Their color scheme defines a set of inks and how to mix these together to get the specified color in their color guide. trond.olsen (talk) 11:39, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  It’s not that they can’t be translated to CIE coordinates, but rather that Pantone has no easily comprehended system behind it, so there’s no logical way to predict the relationship between color and number/code. Each particular Pantone swatch is (probably) defined in terms of CIE coordinates, but you need to look it up in a big table somewhere to figure out what the definition is. –jacobolus (t) 22:58, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Color definition 

message: "Pantone asserts that their lists of color numbers and pigment values are the intellectual property of Pantone"... is it under copyright, patent or trademark law? These are different laws. The word "intellectual property" obscures which one they claim their colour numbers and pigment values are protected by. --Sonjaaa (talk) 17:15, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Intellectual property is vague

message: I see that there is an NPOV tag on the Goe System section, but no comments here on the talk page.  If anyone has a reason for the tag to remain, please indicate your reasons here. --Badger151 (talk) 04:19, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I see from the page history that the NPOV label was applied by User:Trivialist, and have left a message on her (his) talk page asking her to outline her concerns here. --Badger151 (talk) 04:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like User:Trivialist removed NPOV tag. --Badger151 (talk) 17:19, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goe System NPOV 

message: Shouldn't this article be listed under the color article list of articles?  Someone looking up 'color theory' or 'name of a color' because they found a PM #### color name and wondered about it, won't find this article, because this article isn't in the color theory list of articles. 205.158.58.226 (talk) 04:26, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Which list are you referring to? Anyone looking for Pantone should have little difficulty finding this page. –jacobolus (t) 21:18, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Color article? 

message: I'm not totally sure how to handle 2016 having two colors of the year, so I added them based on the schema of previous years. I was thinking it should have the boxes combined, but I'm not fluent enough in wikiformatting to do that.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gspeed0689 (talk • contribs) 23:24, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  2016 Color of the year 

message: The §Pantone Color Matching System previously contained this sentence, which I've removed:
British passports were coloured blue using the 5395 C classification to celebrate Brexit, the United Kingdom's departure from the European Union.
This would be questionable "in popular culture" type content at the best of times, but even ignoring that, it has additional problems that pushed it into the "unsalvageable" category in my mind:
* The tone is utterly unencyclopedic. There is no mention of any "celebration" prompting the color change, it's simply a consequence of the fact that the UK is no longer issuing EU passports.
* Most damningly, the only mention of Pantone in the source is this: "The Home Office would not specify the shade of this blue, although a spokesman said it was close to, if not exactly, a blue numbered as 5395C in the Pantone classification."
So, the color isn't even PMS 5395C, it's merely "close to" it? And that has what to do with Pantone, exactly? -- FeRDNYC (talk) 18:06, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing Brexit passport-color claim 

message: Anyone know if it's Pant-Own, Pant-1, Pant-oh-nay, or what?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.157.195 (talk) 17:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: IP User, it's typically pronounced Pan·tone, with the emphasis on the second syllable. The origins of the name don't appear to be documented (even Pantone's own history is conspicuously silent on it), but the word was almost certainly formed by combining the Greek root pan (meaning "all", as in "panorama" — a view in all directions, or "panoply" — a collection of all variations) with the word "tone" in the sense of color tones or hues. So, "pan-tone": "all the colors". -- FeRDNYC (talk) 23:43, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronunciation

message: Seemingly being the greatest color matching system in the world (for branding anyways), there is surprisingly little information about it in this article. What’s the history? How was it invented? Why did they invent it? When did it gain this massive popularity? Hopefully the article will be expanded with more information about this.
Gutten på Hemsen (talk) 20:48, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone is welcome to research this and add it to the article! –jacobolus (t) 16:35, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins of PMS 

message: Violet is. Other? 2A00:1370:8184:64D4:1DAC:9836:D018:1366 (talk) 02:52, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which are monochromatic? 

message: There was a bit on NPR (I think specifically "Weekend Edition") on 6 November 2022 about Pantone and its fight with Adobe.  Maybe this is worth including. 2600:6C67:1C00:5F7E:59B2:9CE0:AF45:477 (talk) 14:55, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Already mentioned. Pantone Plus was deprecated eons ago. 2A00:1FA0:A99:4D93:49E7:E768:DC31:E0F3 (talk) 19:02, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

text: The audio story is here: https://www.npr.org/2022/11/06/1134608195/in-the-adobe-and-pantone-dispute-creators-are-left-in-the-dark referring to this story in Wired, https://www.wired.com/story/adobe-pantone-color-subscription-fee/ –jacobolus (t) 19:44, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I added a few relevant sentences to this article, based on the Wired story. –jacobolus (t) 20:03, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fight with Adobe 

message: Ultimate gray on my screen as shown on this Wikipedia page looks more like 'Murky Blue' (Even when I hold my hands over the other colors).  On the other hand, at https://www.pantone.com/connect/17-5104-TCX, the color looks distinctly gray.  Is this an error in the Wik entry or a quirk of my computer or Wik software? 2600:6C67:1C00:5F7E:59B2:9CE0:AF45:477 (talk) 15:00, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Pantone.com is not perfect gray, its R is not the same as B, G. 0x93, 0x95, 0x97. Same as in wiki page. That is to be expected, 17-4016 is the same and also note it is TCX. It looks like more or less gray to me, but of course if you will compare to 93, 93, 93, you will see a difference. 2A00:1FA0:A99:4D93:49E7:E768:DC31:E0F3 (talk) 19:00, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Color presentation - ultimate gray 

message: 2021's color of the year was Ultimate Grey, with a citation.
But there's a second Color of the Year, Illuminating - it's pointing to the same Ultimate Grey citation! MarkBelain (talk) 03:06, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking further, I realized it's just that the link should be changed to "PANTONE 17-5104 Ultimate Gray + PANTONE 13-0647 Illuminating". My bad for not noticing that before posting to Talk. MarkBelain (talk) 03:12, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two Colors of the Year for 2021?