« Not with a Bang, but a Whimper | Main | The Whys Of The North Korean Attack »

Facebook Trademarks "Face"

No, really.

Yes, just the word, "face". Er, "Face®". They had to have paid somebody off to get this to happen. Even here, now, in the light of what's gone on with our government and the insane decisions made in the past decade, I just can't honestly believe that they could get away with this.

Somebody wake me up from this bad dream.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (11)

Lets [email protected] it, the lawyers h... (Below threshold)

Lets [email protected] it, the lawyers have us all on strings.

I hope they pay me a royalt... (Below threshold)

I hope they pay me a royalty every time they use Book®. That's mine.

They're protecting their br... (Below threshold)

They're protecting their brand; their target is companies that want to bank on their name recognition (which is an intellectual property).

Let's say there's a site called Faceblog that came along after Facebook became a big deal, and is a social networking site similar to Facebook, but which collects user info and sells it to spammers. Now Facebook can take action to prevent their mutilation of the Facebook brand.

Similar to Toys'R'Us protecting the 'R'Us brand very actively, to prevent the dilution of their brand with copycats that people might think are related in some way to them, like Chainsaws'R'Us or somesuch.

Trademarks are a long-recognized facet of business, and it is one of the cases (similar to patents and copyright) I think government does have a place, at least to a decent extent.

In other words, it's only idiotic on its face.

So can I say face-time as l... (Below threshold)

So can I say face-time as long as I don't capitalize "face"?

I can understand the lowercase "i" preceding the name of a product because it's so distinct, and especially "R" Us as it had never been commonly used before. But "face" is such a common word. This one could really get abused by FaceBook.

I think I'll start a company named "iFaces R Us".

Face Face Face Face Face Fa... (Below threshold)
John F Not Kerry:

Face Face Face Face Face Face Face Face Face Face Face Face Face Face Face Face Face Face

Maybe they are just trying ... (Below threshold)
John F Not Kerry:

Maybe they are just trying to save Face.

Reminds one of the attempt ... (Below threshold)

Reminds one of the attempt by Mickey D to have a Scottish restaurant, which had been in business something like two hundred years, to change it's name from MacDonalds to something else. They were told, in no uncertain terms, to pound sand.

If you read your own link, ... (Below threshold)

If you read your own link, you'd learn that the trademark applies only to "Telecommunication services, namely, providing online chat rooms and electronic bulletin boards for transmission of messages among computer users in the field of general interest and concerning social and entertainment subject matter, none primarily featuring or relating to motoring or to cars."

In other words, only for the business area in which they operate.

What's wrong with that? That's pretty much what trademarks are for.

While I can't fault FB for ... (Below threshold)

While I can't fault FB for doing whatever they can get away with to protect their brand, allowing this TM does seem unreasonable, regardless of the limitation to keep it within the context of their business area.

I thought that trademarking common English words was not something that was typically allowed? Sure you could TM a stylized logo with the word and protect that but certainly not the word.

I wonder what this means for a company like facetime.com, they are in a different but related business segment...

I thought that trademark... (Below threshold)

I thought that trademarking common English words was not something that was typically allowed?

Tell that to Apple, or Shell, or Time, or Caterpillar, or...

Once again, trademarks are allowed only for the business area in which you operate. Open a gas station with "Shell" in the name, or a magazine with "Time" prominent, and you'll get sued. But a gas station named "Time" or a magazine named "Shell" would have no problem.

Great article, Christopher ... (Below threshold)

Great article, Christopher !

I would like to add that the new .co domain is a great alternative to .com.

1. Only 500.000 registered until now since the launch in June. 176m .com to compare
2. Google has approved .co as a domain for international use, meaning that their search engine sees .co websites as interesting both for their local and global search engine.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy