Although I'm a lawyer who's worked on trademark/service-mark
cases, I too think the best reason to keep "listserv" clearly
separate from *both* "list" *and* "mailing list management
program" (or "list server" or whatever) is to avoid confusion.
As long as all alternatives to Aspirin-brand acetosalicylic acid
used the same chemical, confusion was irrelevant.  As soon as
some used acetaminophen, some used ibuprofen, etc., the generic
"pain-killer" began to displace "aspirin."  The big thing is to
get people to understand that confusion about what address does
what *can hurt them* by embarassing them, making them look
inconsiderate, etc.

I sometimes refer to "the list's robot" and to "the list's
people" (or to addresses "for the robot" and "for the people").
The robot, I say, keeps track of who is on the list or not,
& therefore of who gets messages sent "to the list's people."
The robot takes commands, but doesn't understand messages;
people understand messages, but don't act on commands. Messages
sent to the list's people won't get to the list's robot, and
vice-versa.  (I'd probably replace "MLM" with "mail list robot"
if I were to write an article about it.)

Most subscribers don't much care whether the robot is listproc,
listserv, majordomo, almanac, listmanager, or what have you.
They don't much care about someone's trade-or service-mark
concerns.  They don't even much care about making life easier
for the listowner or administrator! (Surprise :-) )  But they
do care about what works for them, and what makes it easier for
them to remember what works or not.  The "send commands to the
robot, send messages to people; they have different addresses"
distinction works for many of them.

Michael Trittipo
Director of Technology
Minnesota State Bar Association