Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Facebook To Own the Word "Face"

Posted by samzenpus on from the what's-in-a-word dept.

Dthief writes "The US Patent And Trademark Office has sent Facebook a Notice of Allowance, which means it will grant the 'Face' trademark to the popular social networking site. Facebook now has three months to pay an issue fee before they officially own the word. From the article: 'For all intents and purposes today's status update bodes well for Facebook's hold over 'face' usages in 'Telecommunication services, namely, providing online chat rooms and electronic bulletin boards for transmission of messages among computer users in the field of general interest and concerning social and entertainment subject matter, none primarily featuring or relating to motoring or to cars.''"

11 of 311 comments (clear)

  1. First "Book" and now "Face"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Didn't they sue someone over the use of the word "Book" (teachersbook) or something like that? This was a common phrase to apply to a year book. This kind of stuff is just beyond me...nobody should be able to own common words or letters.

    1. Re:First "Book" and now "Face"? by countSudoku() · · Score: 5, Funny

      Technically, this means they own the term "fuckface" which is a common synonym for Zuckerberg. So, hat's off to fuckface!

      --
      This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
  2. Facepalm! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    FacePalm!

    1. Re:Facepalm! by Grapplebeam · · Score: 5, Funny

      Apply directly to the forehead! Facepalm! Apply directly to the forehead!

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree.
  3. Apple will have to cede trademark ownership... by shaark78 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    of Facetime?

    1. Re:Apple will have to cede trademark ownership... by AnonymousClown · · Score: 5, Funny

      of Facetime?

      1! 2! 3! 4! I call an IP war!

      --
      RIP America

      July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001

    2. Re:Apple will have to cede trademark ownership... by Marcika · · Score: 5, Funny

      of Facetime?

      1! 2! 3! 4! I call an IP war!

      5! 6! 7! 8! Imitate and Litigate!

    3. Re:Apple will have to cede trademark ownership... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      of Facetime?

      1! 2! 3! 4! I call an IP war!

      5! 6! 7! 8! Imitate and Litigate!

      9! A! B! C! Trademarking is almost free!

  4. Re:So what you're saying is... by pookemon · · Score: 5, Funny

    You'll have to rename it then. I suggest "Arse" (or Ass depending on where you're from).

    ArseSuite, ArseDrafting, ArseSpreadsheet, ArseChat, ArseMediaPlayer and your ultimate favourite ArseFace. :P

    --
    dnuof eruc rof aixelsid
  5. Re:AAAND LO!!! by cappp · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Most of the complaints are arising out of ignorance of the law, and a little internet hyperbole thrown in for good measure. Facebook no more owns the word "face" than Microsoft owns "windows" or McDolands owns "big." The 1st Amendment and Fair Use standards still apply to trademark terms. What is being stopped here, however, is the specific use of a specific term in a specific instance. You're no longer allowed to create a social networking site using Face-, that's all. Hell, even that's not quite true - there are a number of legal routes to doing so if you wanted including challenging the trademark, Fair Use, concurrent use, geographic protections, different industry, and so on. The system is designed to protect consumers from deliberate confusion, and its a good one for all it's flaws. Sure it could do with a little revision but its equally important that people spend some time and actually understand the system they're slamming...inevitablly its not nearly as illogical, stupid, or flawed as some would have you believe.

    There's a great comment on TFA that really nails is. I'm reproducing it here for convenience:

    What Facebook are trying to trademark is the use of the word "face" in electronic applications (Telecommunication as an alternative word for "online") offering social (i.e. facebook like) applications. This make a lot of sense. Just like many other generic terms used in a non trivial way. the word "face" is not descriptive in the way that "myface" describes (literally) an application where people may comment and interact socially. This is why also Apple's FaceTime will not breach the trademark, as it is using the word face literally (enabling the other side of the conversation to see your face) and not referring to the word Face in the non-dictionary meaning of it, which is attributed to facebook's phenomena (namely social networking). This doesn't give facebook the rights for the use of the word face for a face recognition software, or for other non related use. I personally agree that facebook should get the rights for the usage of the word face in the "social network" meaning, as they created this meaning, and protect them from people launching services named faceXXX or XXXface that may indicate relationship to facebook. This is just like caterpillar trademarking the word "cat" for construction and manufacturing equipment (but not getting rights for CatFeeder, or LolCats).

  6. Re:So what you're saying is... by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... ArseSpreadsheet...

    Does that work out to a goatse joke somehow?

    --
    You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office