Companies Want To Insert Ads Into Unicode (thenextweb.com)

AmiMoJo writes: Food company Nestle has started a petition to get a KitKat emoji into the Unicode standard. They aren't alone, Taco Bell wants a taco emoji added, and Durex suggested adding a condom. While the latter two are at least generic, KitKat is a trademark of Nestle and the "break" image a key part of their marketing. Next year Unicode will include a faceplam emoji (U+1F926) for occasions such as this.

Comments

Sure

[Anonymous Coward]

Just assign the images, trademarks and logos over to the public domain and we are done.

Why emojis/emoticons are in Unicode?

[Parker Lewis]

Can someone explain me why emojis are in Unicode at all?

Re:Why emojis/emoticons are in Unicode?

[undecim11]

Japan

This

[Anonymous Coward]

This is why I hate Emojis.

Seriously, they were a bad idea to begin with. Then the politically correct nazis started getting upset about them. And now this.

None of this should be in Unicode. If you want stupid little graphics in your text, then use stupid little graphics.

U+1F36B Chocolate Bar

[tepples]

That's why U+1F36B is a generic chocolate bar rather than a HERSHEY'S® bar.

Re:U+1F36B Chocolate Bar

[mwvdlee]

I spoke too soon.
The proposed misappropriation of the word "break" is plain and pure evil.

If "apple" were to be included in UTF-8, it should be a generic apple-shaped fruit symbol, not the computer brand trademark.

Similarly, any "break" symbol, if adopted in UTF-8 in the proposed context of "a small time-out in between work", should be a generic symbol indicating such, not one indicating a specific brands' marketing campaign.

Douglas Adams' described marketeers best: "A bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes".

Re:U+1F926

[MachineShedFred]

I prefer U+1F595