According to Realtor.org the use of realtor goes back to 1916 (ditto for first cite in the OED), and perhaps a few years earlier. Although the term wasn’t registered as a trademark until 1949. (Note that what counts in trademark law is use, not registration. Registration goes a long way in helping you win lawsuits because you can prove you have been using the term and that the defendant should have known better, but it’s not an essential element of owning the trademark.)

But trademark is also somewhat irrelevant to literary use of the term. You can’t sue an author for “misusing” a trademark in a novel (well, I guess you can sue, but you won’t win; this doesn’t include using a trademarked term in a book title as opposed to the text, which is probably actionable because it might give the false impression that the book is part of the trademarked product line; titles of books, as opposed to text, can be trademarked themselves). Trademarks are all about distinguishing products and services from the competition. People are free to use trademarked terms in other contexts.

And writers (or anyone) are never obligated to format the trademarked term as the owners desire or to include the trademark symbol. The owners of the trademark do this so they can continually show that they are trying to protect the trademark, but no one else in under any obligation. And even the owners don’t have to, although if don’t do so consistently they could end up losing the trademark if it is ever challenged in court. The Associated Press Style Guide, for example, says to first avoid using a trademarked term if a generic one will work in the specific context; if a trademarked term is used to capitalize the initial letter but not to include any trademark symbols.

Why Babbitt’s disdain for “real estate”?

The disdain was for the term “real estate man,” which Babbitt thought unprofessional sounding.

The line, as cited by the OED, is:

1922 S. LEWIS Babbitt xiii. 157 We ought to insist that folks call us ‘realtors’ and not ‘real-estate men’. Sounds more like a reg’lar profession.

You can’t sue an author for “misusing” a trademark in a novel (well, I guess you can sue, but you won’t win;....And writers (or anyone) are never obligated to format the trademarked term as the owners desire or to include the trademark symbol.

Stanley Schmidt, editor of the sf magazine Analog, speaking at a convention I attended some years ago, described receiving vaguely threatening letters from lawyers representing various trademark holders because the trademarked terms had been used generically in stories in the magazine, among a list of the regular hassles of being an editor.  (For instance, and this is not a real quote or even necessarily a company that actually sent such letters, they would object to “he sneezed into a kleenex”; it should either be “he sneezed into a tissue” or “he sneezed into a Kleenex™ brand facial tissue”.

Which is not to disagree with Dave, but just to point out that the fact that they could never win such a suit doesn’t necessarily stop trademark holders from hassling writers and editors about such things.

Dave Wilton - 07 May 2008 06:01 AM

The disdain was for the term “real estate man,” which Babbitt thought unprofessional sounding.

It beats used-house salesman.

Faldage - 07 May 2008 03:41 PM

Dave Wilton - 07 May 2008 06:01 AM

The disdain was for the term “real estate man,” which Babbitt thought unprofessional sounding.

It beats used-house salesman.

Which is what they are.  The UK term, “estate agent” is more confusing, because they only very rarely are agents for a landed estate. These tend to be called “land agents” to avoid confusion.