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

  • Thales
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3742 years ago

    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.

  • @Supervivens@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2092 years ago

    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.

  • Ghostalmedia
    link
    fedilink
    English
    752 years ago

    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.

    • SuperJetShoes
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 years ago

      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:

      1. Small co files against large co for using same name
      2. Large co produces huge response document which is all piss and wind
      3. Small co says they can’t afford the costs to answer each point
      4. Judge permits Small Co to use Legal Aid.
      5. 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…

      • @kautau@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        372 years 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

  • @Treczoks@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    372 years ago

    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”.

      • @chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        282 years ago

        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…

        • JohnEdwa
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Because unless you want every company to be a random Amazon brand or initialism, that’s how it kinda has to be, and it works fine until one company gains so much market share the word starts being associated with only them.
          Think of like, Target or Shell. Both are huge companies, but their fields are narrow. You might confuse a Target named restaurant or pharmacy to be the Target, but probably not much more. And if it doesn’t have anything to do with oil or gas, it’s almost certainly not that Shell.

          Apple is just so huge I wouldn’t be surprised if at this point people think of iPhones while buying lunch. And even they started as “Apple Computers, inc”, because they wouldn’t have gotten just “Apple” if they had tried.

  • @MrFlamey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    272 years ago

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

    • @zaphod@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      162 years ago

      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”.

      • @BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        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.

        • @ByteJunk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          It depends. Apple is a valid trademark for a computers/electronics company, despite being a common name. It wouldn’t work if you tried to trademark it as an apple pie brand however.

          I assume whoever owns this threads trademark is in the software business too, they may have a valid claim if so.

        • Alien Nathan Edward
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          would the enforceability of a trademark in this situation not also depend on whether an average person could easily distinguish the meta threads app from the other company? It’s been a while since I took this class and admittedly it was for non-majors but the way it was explained to us is that you can open a used car lot called “McDonald’s”, you just can’t sell burgers or lead people to believe that the burger joint is now selling used cars.

          • @BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 years ago

            Probably, I don’t know, TBH the elective course I took was single week of summer school, 2 ECTS points, passed by attendance. And it was around 2010.

        • downhomechunk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          So what you’re saying is they can rename it threadz. You’re hired!

          • @BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            32 years ago

            Why do you think that so many companies have ordinary sounding names with weird spelling? Sure, it communicates “We’re hip and creative”, but it’s definitely also a trademark thing.

  • @Octavio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    272 years ago

    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.

      • @Octavio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        112 years 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.