1y ago

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

www.techspot.com Meta given 30 days to cease using the name Threads by company that trademarked it 11 years ago

Threads Software Limited says its lawyers have informed Meta that it will seek an injunction from the courts if the Facebook parent keeps using the name Threads...

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

Technology @beehaw.org

Five @slrpnk.net

1y ago

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

www.techspot.com /news/100666-meta-given-30-days-cease-using-name-threads.html

191 18

Fediverse @lemmy.ml

Five @slrpnk.net

1y ago

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

www.techspot.com /news/100666-meta-given-30-days-cease-using-name-threads.html

309 33

118 comments

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.
- Looks like it's his only original idea.
- Didn't they do the same thing to Meta? Aren't they being sued now?

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.
- 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.
  
  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)_/¯
  
  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.
  
  Pretty sure the original company will accept at a certain price, they just want to put legal pressure to make it rise, which is fair.
- 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.
- What's the chrome cast one?
  
  Basically a company had a patent of a barely similar device that shouldve fallen under common sense patent law and had zero plans on produce/selling the product. They’re basically just a company thats the patent equivalent of landlords
- They should call it Y.

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.
- 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.
  
  Both Threads are designed to strip-mine data from messages.
  Zuck's is just pretending it's about something else.
- If it's all in writing you can't just force another company to do what you want. What you can do is wriggle, twist and delay until it becomes too expensive for the smaller company to continue to pursue.
  However judges are more than well aware of this technique and will allow the plaintiff to accrue costs against Legal Aid (paid for by government).
  So what usually happens:
  Small co files against large co for using same name
  Large co produces huge response document which is all piss and wind
  Small co says they can't afford the costs to answer each point
  Judge permits Small Co to use Legal Aid.
  Large co offers to settle. (E.g. you're a 3 person sandwich shop. They offer you £10m. No more work, no more hassle)
  If Small Co is energetic, young and courageous, they may choose to fight to the death. But Legal Aid has a limit...

It is too bad Meta couldn't afford a lawyer to do a search for trademarks and copyrights. Really shame.
- 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.
  
  It was sarcasm. Meta has lots of money.
  
  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.
- You think they were unaware?
  
  They already planned for this. They’ll settle out of court. It’s pennies to them and a planned business expense, like a fine

Completely forgot Threads was even a thing.
- So did everyone else lol

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".
- 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"
  
  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.
- Someone was able to trademark the word "Apple", so that's not so surprising
  
  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...
  
  Which, for me, also falls under "why the heck was this legal at any time?"

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.
- Are you sure UK court allows it ? Because they filed in UK.
  
  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.
  
  UK has a fairer legal system overall, but Meta will delay, delay, delay to avoid accountability and keep using the Threads name for the next umpteen years, and at some point the original owner of the trademark will settle for a nice payday (though nothing like what they'd win if they beat Meta's team of lawyers... which won't happen).
- Depressing that people treat money winning over justice as a given. There is realism, and then there's defeatism.

There's no love lost between me and Meta, but I'm just gon' leave this here:
Against Intellectual Monopoly
- Your link doesn't work for me. Is this the same?
  https://nakamotoinstitute.org/static/docs/against-intellectual-monopoly.pdf
  
  Yes

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

Well can't they just call it Meta Threads or Threads by Meta if it isn't already, and nothing has to change.
- 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".
  
  Not an expert either, and I'm definitely not a lawyer. But I did take an elective class in uni on IPR.
  Generally you can have two types of trademarks. You can use graphics as your trademark or a word. And your trademark must be unique to be defendable.
  The word can't be something that is already in use, if you want to register it as a wordmark. Ie you can't register the word "beer" and market beer under that trademark. What you can register is alternative spelling or your logo.
  The word "threads" is a word that was used previously. It has a meaning already. So you can't register it as a wordmark.
  This is one of the reasons why alphabet really hates that people use the word "google" as a verb, or LEGO that people call the bricks "legos", as it diminishes the trademarkability of the word and thus makes defending the trademark harder.
  If both companies tries to claim the word "threads" they'll have a pretty weak case. While I don't know exactly what this is about, I suspect that the headline doesn't give the full picture of the dispute.
- That would be the sensible approach, but some executive is propably throwing tantrum because of their injured pride. I will be surprised if they just comply.

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
- Poor lads probably got insane amounts of traffic

LMAO; Fuck you Facebook!

Where have I seen this before? Oh yeah: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_Games
They'll be fine.

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

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

I wonder if Posts is taken....... lol Twitter switched to one letter. I kind of prefer the made up ethnically ambiguous names than the short ones.
- I mean ... could they just use Twitter since that's not in use any more?
  
  Elon still owns the Twitter trademark, and can sue if anyone tries to use it.
  
  Doesn't Zuck the trademark to X, or was that just a joke going around?

Not to be confused with the movie of the same name that, unlike Meta's service, made me a miserable drunk
I'm sure Meta Legal knew and would deal with it when the time came.
- Even the name Meta was trademarked by others and they paid a lot for the rights to use it

What a disaster

again? didnt they have to pay that woman who was regged as meta on insta aswell? like there is nothing at all original about marcs "ideas".

Bad move Lizard King
- quick reptile tongue slurp

Zuckbot just got his ass kicked lol. 🤣
- Yeah. The group making billions in profit every quarter is sure getting their ass kicked. Facebook is dying too, right?

New name: "Y"

I don't like Meta, but this is fucking ridiculous. You can't just trademark a word.
- 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."
  
  Delta coffee
  
  So you could hava "Delta decent airlines" and "Delta fucking shit piss-stained seats threadbare aircraft $15 50ml Coke cans" then?
  Totally different market sectors.
  
  Could you imagine 20 different brands of Coke on the shelf?
  Yes because that's exactly how it is in Germany. Coke isn't a trademark. CokaCola is.
  
  Ever been to the south? Coke is literally the term for all soda. Can I get an orange coke?
- 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.
  
  Meta will disclaim the word Threads because it is too generic. So you can trademark whatever you want, but when someone comes along and wants to use it, if you've trademarked something generic, like Threads, then you go to court and presumably have them rule whether or not you can use it. And that probably will happen.
- 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.
- I agree, but tell that to Rockstar.
  EDIT: I assume the downvoters aren’t familiar with Rockstar suing every indie game dev who released a game with “Monster” or “Monsters” in the title.

I can make it worse. Let's call it Yarn now. Also, let's downvote my comment. I've ran out of good ideas.

Well everyone, you can reach on lanyards.app @bitwolf

Eh it's such a genetic term trademark arguments are hard to make here. Also their completely different niches. Boring corporate bs thats only making news because people (rightfully) hate Metas Threads.
- Wholly incorrect. I work in trademark law and yeah you have no idea what you're talking about.
  
  So... hypothetically, what if I've already used his comment as legal advice to launch my social network, "PepSi"?
  Is DrMoose on the hook for damages, to me? What are my options here?
  
  I never claimed anything about the law just commented how uninteristing and dumb this whole thing is.
- I'm so confident in your legal analysis, which is clearly well thought out and legally sound, that I've launched my new social network "PepSi".
  Gotta say, I'm feeling good about this one. No way it goes tits up.

118 comments