Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Says It Owns 'Book'
An anonymous reader writes "The Chicago Tribune is reporting that Facebook has sued a tiny start-up called Teachbook.com over the use of 'book' in its name. The start-up, which has two employees, aims to provide tools for teachers to manage their classrooms and share lesson plans and other resources. 'Effectively they're bombing a mosquito here, and we're not sure why they want to do that,' Teachbook.com co-director Greg Shrader told the Tribune. Facebook said its use of 'book' in its name is 'highly distinctive in the context of online communities and networking websites.' Facebook apparently is alleging that no other online 'network of people' can use the word 'book' in its name without violating its trademark."
http://www.fuckbook.com/
Oh man, fuck off, Facebook, you giant corporate retard.
This trademark and patent stuff is getting beyond a joke. No-one will be able to do anything soon for fear of infringing on somethingorother from them or Amazon or Apple or MS or MPEG LA or blah blah because they claim they got to buttons or text or selling some bullshit first or some crap. No wonder innovation is drying up, piracy and sticking it to the man is rampant and no-one gives a toss about anything - everyone's too busy covering their own ass and hoping it will all magically go away.
There's protecting your innovation, trademarks, rights, etc. and then there's being a giant muppet. Facebook is a giant muppet.
Did some peeking on the wayback machine... domain names that were registered before facebook launched: flybook.com sportsbook.com buybook.com computerbook.com skybook.com Perhaps the most damning, though.... Buddybook.com.. this is from way back in 1999: "Welcome to Buddy Book.com, an innovative internet address book which helps keep track of all your online experiences." http://web.archive.org/web/19991128035308/http://buddybook.com/ It's not that similar to facebook, true... but it's a 'social' thing, which by their own logic, seems to be close enough... whoever owns that site ought to sue them!
Teachbook appears to be a social/community website, close to the area of what Facebook does. I would think that the "teachbook" name was chosen on purpose to be "facebook for teachers/teaching". Well, you can't do that without facebook going after you. IANAL so I don't know if facebook can or should prevail, but it seems to me that they sort of have a point.
Now, contrast this to a previous action of facebook: http://techcrunch.com/2010/08/10/facebook-placebook/
They went after a startup travel website, i.e. a site for you to book vacations in the places you visit called... well... placebook! I mean who better for the name placebook than a site where you book... places... The site in question had, in the end, to back down and change their name to triptrace: http://blog.triptrace.com/2010/08/19/we-tell-the-world-placebook-is-now-triptrace/ . Now THAT was ridiculous.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
on second thoughts: FaceJet which will bring on Facebook, Easyjet and the porn industry.
Normally I would be strongly opposed to that kind of thing but since Facebook appears to have completely lost the plot it seems we are facing the rare situation where a book burning is warranted.
The surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.
I wonder if they will go after the telecoms - after all, phonebook is a kind of huge listing of phone-using community...
Given that teachbook is a social networking site but for a specialized niche, I think it's fair to say that they are doing that. In my opinion they should have that right, though. Trademark law makes sense - other companies shouldn't be able to impersonate yours, but that should be limited to there being an actual chance of confusion. Doing something similar as someone else, and profiting from an established market - well that's just capitalism. Facebook can always compete by having a better product.
Facebook argues: If others could freely use 'generic plus BOOK' [...] the suffix BOOK could become a generic term for [...] 'social networking services'
Again, I think that's probably true but that is how language works, and they should have to live with that.
Someone needs to start a facebook group about boycotting facebook!
Not only must they live with that (..BOOK being a generic term for social networking services), but if there's such an obvious association, they should be thankful that they will be getting free advertising indefinitely, the way the big G does every time someone tells you to go google something.
Zuckerberg, is that you?
How about -space as a social networking suffix? or -dot or -gadget for tech sites or the file- prefix for download sites?
At which point does an entity get to decide that it owns a random word that forms *part* of its name? Just because they're the biggest? It would seem that they're not the first, so that argument doesn't stand up. Why -book and not face-, or will the face- lawsuits be coming shortly?
I thought the phonebook was a way to look up your friends before facebook was. Or your little black book. Or your datebook. Or your yearbook. Or your address book.
Silly me.
Given that teachbook is a social networking site but for a specialized niche, I think it's fair to say that they are doing that.
If you go to http://www.uspto.gov/ and search for "book" you get over 9.000 results, including hankybook, partybook, planbook mobook. I'm pretty sure this is FB's record. Their description of services pretty much covers the earth, moon and stars online. It seems overly broad, even including peer-to-browser photo sharing services namely, providing a website featuring technology enabling users to upload, view and download digital photos. I'm not sure how it got through without being narrowed.
Normally there's a reference that says it's not an attempt to trademark a generic word (like "book") but I don't see that in FB's app. Probably because their mark is FACEBOOK and not FACE BOOK. I'm not entirely sure, I've only been through the process a couple times.
Seems like a stretch to me. If their name was "teacherfacebook", then I'd side with FB. But trying to trademark "book" in the context of any online collection of individuals seems way out of line. Since one could argue that online repositories are merely a modern evolution of books, then you're basically letting FB trademark the world.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
The legal concern isn't just that they're making a similar competing product, or that there will be confusion that Teachbook IS Facebook. The concern is that there will be confusion that Teachbook is a product of the Facebook team or that it is endorsed by Facebook or that it is affiliated with Facebook in any way. There are many families of products that share a particular element in their names, so it's not a far-fetched concern.
We've gone over this time and time again, for many different companies and products. Facebook is obliged by law to actively defend their trademark when the name of a competing product is similar and is in the same line of business. This is not a case where we can attribute any motivation to Facebook other than the fact that they're trying to carry out their legal obligations to retain their trademark. They risk losing the legal status of their trademark if they don't sue. Whether their claims are valid are for the courts to decide.
Other posts have said "what about this? What about that?" There are a few considerations to take. Did, e.g., Fuckbook file a trademark application for its name? Are cookbooks social networking sites? Some of the suggestions are simply absurd.
I mean, I hate trying to defend Facebook (indeed, I may even find Teachbook useful in a couple months' time), but you guys don't really have a problem with Facebook here. What you guys have a problem with is the law that requires Facebook to do stuff like this. But instead of recognizing this and having a meaningful conversation about whether or not trademark law is reasonable in its obligations, the editors allow flamebait articles like this on the site and get people all riled up not against the cause of the issue, but against only one of the many symptoms of the issue. Absolutely ridiculous. Quit feeding the trolls, guys.
How about backslashdot.com? It could be a highly biased, glorified blog that praises Windows and slanders Linux.
Do you think they'll come after me for bookbook.com?
It's a social networking site for chickens...
----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
In my experience, a directory/book for private high schools and colleges which shows a head-shot of each student and faculty member, gives their address on campus and their home address, has been called a "Facebook" for a long time. And seeing as Facebook was originally open to only .edu users, I'm pretty sure that was the idea.
That's what it was called at the school I attended in the early 90's anyway.
Apple: "Marines! surrender!"
Marines: "WTF??? NEVER!!"
Apple: "In 10 minutes we'll start bricking your iphones one by one if you don't!"
Marines: "You do realize we can flatten your headquarters in minutes?"
Apple: "Touchè"
FTFY
Facebook is a colloquial term for yearbook (the book that contains the faces of your classmates) in parts of the USA - I had an American girlfriend when Facebook launched who was surprised that I didn't know what a facebook was. It wasn't a word based on another word, they named the site after an existing generic term. Now they are complaining that the term is generic. Definite contenders for a 'you should have thought of that earlier' award.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Or your old college face book.
Face book is a generic slang term for a yearbook.