Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Merck Threatens Merck With Legal Action Over Facebook URL

Posted by Unknown on from the who-what-when-where dept.

angry tapir writes with an excerpt from a Techworld article: "Germany's Merck KGaA has threatened legal action after it said it lost its Facebook page apparently to rival Merck & Co. in the U.S., though it has yet to identify defendants in the case. In a filing before the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Merck said it intends to initiate an action based on the apparent takeover of its Facebook page at www.facebook.com/merck by its similarly-named but unrelated competitor, Merck & Co."

7 of 115 comments (clear)

  1. Not unrelated by leathered · · Score: 5, Informative

    Merck was a single German company prior to WWI, their North American assets were seized by the US government in 1917 and is now Merck & Co. What remained in Germany is now Merck KGaA.

    --
    For all intensive porpoises your a bunch of rediculous loosers
    1. Re:Not unrelated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      So the US liberated them?

    2. Re:Not unrelated by AgNO3 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes the US liberated them much like the peaceful liberation of Tibet by China

      --
      OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink :-(
    3. Re:Not unrelated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not quite. That may be their "international HQ" (i.e., their base for international operations), but in terms of the company overall, according to your link, "Facebook is a privately-held company and is headquartered in Palo Alto, Calif."

  2. I'm with Merck on this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hope they take Merck to the cleaners while defending their IP.

  3. Re:Patents were affected by WW1 also by sortius_nod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not what you pirate, but who sanctions the piracy.

  4. Re:Companies suing companies? But, but........ by artor3 · · Score: 5, Informative

    185F is reasonable for the temperature the coffee is prepared at, not the temperature at which it is served. It should be served closer to 160F. McDonald's was overheating it so that it would stay hot longer (allowing them to serve it for a longer period, and thus make fewer pots over the day).

    Furthermore, the woman only asked for $20k, barely enough to cover her medical expenses and lost work hours. She wasn't being greedy at all. It was McDonald's choice to risk a jury trial, and they paid for it. Losing a jury trial should be more expensive than settling, otherwise corporations have no incentive to ever settle with us comparatively short-lived humans.