When Does a Company Become "Too" Big...?

by 12 replies
14
Facebook Own the word "book"... apparently...

Thought a lot of you would like to see this:

Facebook sues social media site with ‘book’ in name | Chicago Breaking Business

Steve
#main internet marketing discussion forum #big #company
  • Well if that is true. I imagine they never learned anything from watching Microsoft trying to make the word "Windows" a trademark...

    EDIT: Actually the story might even be fake to create a buzz... hehe
  • I'm on Facebooks side on this one.

    They even gave warning a year in advance.

    The social media site knew EXACTLY what they were doing and tried to use the "book" as a gimmik which Facebook spent billions of dollars to brand.
  • they dont own it, but they are trying to. i dont think they will ever be granted that trademark, its too broad.
    • [1] reply

    • There was a Starbucks case where starbucks won

      There was a coffee shop called .XXXXBucks don't remember the first part

      They existed BEFORE Starbucks and still HAD to change their name.
      • [2] replies
  • It is important to remember that it is not the actual word "book" in the URL that is the problem. It is context and the content of the website itself that causes the problem.

    For instance Facebook will probably win this one, but if they took on a mom and pop book shop because they used the word "book" in their URL, they would lose.

    Its not just the word, but the way it is used.

    I know this is all blindingly obvious to most of you, but I just thought I would mention it for newbies.
  • I'm sorry, but I'm with facebook on this.

    It's basically stealing an idea. I's not the word, It's the context it's used in. You wouldn't launch a search site called zoogle would you? If it was an article site called zoogle then thats fine.

    A social network with the same "generic plus book" looks a bit copycat and could encorage others to do the same.
  • I agree the problem is the context in which the name is used and what for.

    On first glance you would think it is over the top to go after a company with 20 users signed up but, perhaps they are concerned it would set a precedent.
    • [1] reply
    • Although I'm not a lawyer, at one time I did have motivation to do some serious research on trademarks...

      Starbucks won their case, and Facebook will likely win theirs as well. As I recall, one of the criteria for trademark infringement is the probability of creating confusion in the marketplace.

      Steve, you are absolutely correct here. The size of the company they go after has nothing to do with it.

      A company that fails to protect its trademark stands to lose it. If they let the "company with 20 users signed up" violate their trademark, they could end up trying to compete with many more xxxxxxbooks. Any future company, if sued, could simply point back to the little company and tell the judge FB failed to enforce their trademark in that instance. Why should they be able to enforce it now?
  • GEE, don't start a recovery firm called aboutFACE.,com!

    BTW IBM did *******NOT******* win their trademark ifringment case against IBM!!!!!!!

    It's TRUE! I actually WORKED on IBMs computer system. IT wasn't even made by IBM! It was made by DEC, one of IBMs COMPETITORS! How is THAT for confusing! How is THIS! Don't worry about the fact that IBMs system was made by DEC, one of IBMs BIGGEST competitors at the time! DEC was NOT one of IBMs competitors!

    OK, IBM LOST its case against IBM because the judge said there would be no confusion because IBM and IBM weren't even in the same business!

    IBM, aka International Business MACHINES, was a LARGE INTERnational company that dealt primarily with computer software/hardware, computer services, and computer consulting.

    IBM, aka International Business MANAGEMENT, on the other hand, was a relatively small widely NATIONAL company that dealt primarily with business services, and business management.

    So you see, nobody could confuse IBM with IBM because IBM was so different from IBM, never mind that they both effectively had the SAME name!!

    Steve
Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed