1088
submitted 10 months ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

Meta given 30 days to cease using the name Threads by company that trademarked it 11 years ago::undefined

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] thal3s@sh.itjust.works 464 points 10 months ago

It appears that Meta was aware of Threads before launching its platform of the same name. Company lawyers made four offers to purchase the domain 'threads.app' from Threads Software Ltd from April 2023, all of which were declined. Meta announced Threads in July 2023, the same time that the British company says it was removed from Facebook.

Classic Facebook douchebaggery.

[-] CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world 24 points 10 months ago

Didn't they do the same thing to Meta? Aren't they being sued now?

[-] Supervivens@lemmy.world 256 points 10 months ago

Eh, unlike some of the other pretty blatantly frivolous lawsuits we’ve seen lately (such as the google chrome cast one) this seems pretty legit. They had a globally recognized company called threads that worked in the software industry and meta had made multiple offers for their IP showing they knew about them and still went ahead. Seems clear cut and Meta will likely have to change the name.

[-] long_chicken_boat@sh.itjust.works 99 points 10 months ago

you're right in almost everything

Seems clear cut and Meta will likely have to change the name.

Meta has a massive amount of resources, I'm sure they can afford more lawyers than the British company. Courts tend to favor the one with most resources, so the smaller company will have a very hard time trying to make Meta to change their app's name.

[-] agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 69 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

If I was a judge I'd tell meta their attempt to buy what they wanted, then breaking IP law as soon as money couldn't get what they wanted in hopes money in court would get them what they want is enough guilt for me. You really don't need a degree in behavioral science to know a tantrum when you see one. This is a money tantrum by meta. Probably why im not a judge but hey, don't tell me you wouldn't enjoy a system that doesn't give the benefit of the doubt to those that did everything to prove they're irresponsible with said benefit.

[-] gregorum@lemm.ee 52 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Not so much in the UK, but we’ll just have to wait and see. It may just end up that, in the UK, they’ll be called ThreadsUK or some legally-acceptable variant of the name that “meaningfully distinguishes” them according to the court.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] takeda@lemmy.world 50 points 10 months ago

It should be easy to rename as no one is using it.

But seriously, this is the kind of bullshit those monopolistic companies are doing all the time. Another infuriating one was with Google's Go language. Author contacted them that he was using the name for 10 years and even had a book written about the language, but they basically just went with it anyway, because he was nobody and they were Google. Also, this is speculating, but I won't believe when they came up with the name they didn't use their Google to look the name up, probably that's why they closed the issue so quickly.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] MNByChoice@midwest.social 96 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It is too bad Meta couldn't afford a lawyer to do a search for trademarks and copyrights. Really shame.

[-] Resolute3542@lemmy.dbzer0.com 48 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Did you even read the article??

It appears that Meta was aware of Threads before launching its platform of the same name. Company lawyers made four offers to purchase the domain 'threads.app' from Threads Software Ltd from April 2023, all of which were declined. Meta announced Threads in July 2023, the same time that the British company says it was removed from Facebook.

They literally made an offer to buy the domain Threads.app 4 times and got rejected.

[-] MNByChoice@midwest.social 19 points 10 months ago

It was sarcasm. Meta has lots of money.

[-] Obi@sopuli.xyz 15 points 10 months ago

And then figured they'd be fine if they deleted their Facebook account. If your Facebook account gets deleted you get deleted in real life, after all.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] capital@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago

You think they were unaware?

[-] kautau@lemmy.world 43 points 10 months ago

They already planned for this. They’ll settle out of court. It’s pennies to them and a planned business expense, like a fine

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 94 points 10 months ago

I don’t know about UK trademark law, but I would imagine that, like with other countries, using a similar or identical name is okay, but only if you’re in a totally different industry. The original threads is also a messaging product, which doesn’t bode well for a lawsuit.

I imagine they thought they could just force a smaller company’s hand. Meta’s marketing, e-staff, and legal team are a bunch of corporate bullies.

[-] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 19 points 10 months ago

Threads is a cloud-based intelligent message hub that captures, transcribes, and organizes all of a company's digital messages, emails, and phone calls into one easily searchable database.

B2B is a completely different marketplace than B2C, and “internal search index of company’s digital messages” is a different industry than “social media app.”

The company’s own trademark registration indicates the trademark applies to “computer software, software and apparatus for the extraction of business information and knowledge.” That doesn’t sound like a social media app to me, either.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] johnthedoe@lemmy.ml 68 points 10 months ago

Completely forgot Threads was even a thing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Treczoks@lemm.ee 48 points 10 months ago

I don't know which concerns me more: That Meta gets their asses kicked, or why the f-ck someone was able to trademark the word "Threads".

[-] ezchili@iusearchlinux.fyi 38 points 10 months ago

You don't trademark the word "threads", you trademark it within the context of the industry you're in

I can make a shop that sells pies and call it "Apple"

[-] Mamertine@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago

Well... Apple may come after your pie shop. You'll likely win if you have the resources to fight it.

Monster Cable, they fight anyone who uses the word "monster" including mini golf places

https://www.npr.org/transcripts/98013289

Tldr, monster Cable is ran by shit humans who like to litigate.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] the_ocs@lemmy.world 28 points 10 months ago

Someone was able to trademark the word "Apple", so that's not so surprising

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 33 points 10 months ago

Twice.

And when Apple violated the agreement they made with Apple Music not to enter each other's industries (Apple Records couldn't sell tech and Apple Computers couldn't sell music), they successfully argued in court that iTunes wasn't selling music, but digital downloads...

[-] ByGourou@sh.itjust.works 16 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

How stupid must the court be to agree that Apple music isn't about selling music...

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Octavio@lemmy.world 43 points 10 months ago

Gosh if only Meta hd money for lawyers, they could squish this like a bug. Oh, yeah. They do have money for lawyers. Tons of it.

[-] topinambour_rex@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago

Are you sure UK court allows it ? Because they filed in UK.

[-] Octavio@lemmy.world 15 points 10 months ago

I don’t know anything about UK law but in my observations, giant corporations with tons of cash and armies of ~~lawyers~~ solicitors do what they want. I could be wrong but it is just my cynical view, not legal advice.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] LengAwaits@lemmy.world 37 points 10 months ago

There's no love lost between me and Meta, but I'm just gon' leave this here:

Against Intellectual Monopoly

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] MrFlamey@lemmy.world 33 points 10 months ago

Well can't they just call it Meta Threads or Threads by Meta if it isn't already, and nothing has to change.

[-] zaphod@feddit.de 21 points 10 months ago

Not an expert on trademark law, but I think "Threads by Meta" would not work as the main part of that name would still be "Threads", "Meta Threads" could work, but if they'd make the "Meta" part not prominent in the branding then again it would probably be considered as only "Threads".

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] newIdentity@sh.itjust.works 25 points 10 months ago

I don't like Meta, but this is fucking ridiculous. You can't just trademark a word.

[-] madeinthebackseat@lemmy.world 60 points 10 months ago

Yes you can, that is the definition of what a trademark is.

Could you imagine 20 different brands of Coke on the shelf?

The usage is specific to a market, however. For example, Delta Airlines and Delta Faucets. Both trademark "Delta."

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago

You literally can. That's what trade marks are.

You can't copyright a word. You can't patent a word. But you can trademark a word. Trademarking a word gives you the exclusive right to use that word to identify your products but only within the specific market it is registered in.

A few more examples of trade marked words, apple, meta, cherry, target, zoom.

Are any of those trade names invalid simply because they are preexisting words? No. That's trademark law.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 15 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

According to Trademark law in many places you can.

Generally, you can only enforce your trademark (successfully) if the infringing group is in the same industry. So if I sold an educational service or toilet bowl cleaner called Apple the tech and music giant can't go after me for trademark infringement, though for music, computer tech and software they would have a case.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ramblinguy@sh.itjust.works 22 points 10 months ago

There's another threads too that my company used to use for internal posts (referenced in the article): https://threads.com/

Interesting that they managed to keep the .com name

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SleepingTower@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago

Where have I seen this before? Oh yeah: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_Games

They'll be fine.

[-] netchami@sh.itjust.works 21 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

LMAO; Fuck you Facebook!

[-] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 17 points 10 months ago

Isn't this just business news? Where's the tech?

[-] nutsack@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I'm sure Meta will either pay them out or bankrupt them in court.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2023
1088 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

58125 readers
3466 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS