this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2023
1090 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

57453 readers
4610 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
 

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 472 points 9 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 9 months ago

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

[–] [email protected] 260 points 9 months ago (6 children)

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 95 points 9 months ago (4 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The UK courts will be inclined to favour the UK company over an American conglomerate. They have to operate within the confines of the law but the British government really do want to show that they can actually act against these big multinationals (they need the win) so there may be quite a lot of interest in this case.

I can totally see the courts been heavily encouraged to throw the book at them as much as possible.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 51 points 9 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)
[–] [email protected] 94 points 9 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 9 months ago (1 children)

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)
[–] [email protected] 90 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 45 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 9 months ago

It was sarcasm. Meta has lots of money.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 9 months ago (1 children)

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)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You think they were unaware?

[–] [email protected] 45 points 9 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

[–] [email protected] 69 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Completely forgot Threads was even a thing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 48 points 9 months ago (2 children)

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".

[–] [email protected] 38 points 9 months ago (1 children)

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"

[–] [email protected] 19 points 9 months ago (4 children)

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)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 9 months ago (5 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 33 points 9 months ago (3 children)

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 17 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 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)
[–] [email protected] 42 points 9 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (3 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 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)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 9 months ago (3 children)

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)
[–] [email protected] 34 points 9 months ago

Fun fact: Google has to pay royalties to Windsor Castle since they had a Keep product first.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 9 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 22 points 9 months ago (8 children)

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)
[–] ramblinguy 22 points 9 months ago (1 children)

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)
[–] netchami 21 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

LMAO; Fuck you Facebook!

[–] [email protected] 20 points 9 months ago

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

They'll be fine.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

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

load more comments
view more: next ›