2 ms·
> (good luck calling it fair use) Fair use is a defense against copyright infringement, it has nothing to do with trademark infringement. The relevant test he
by x1798DE 10y ago
> (good luck calling it fair use)
Fair use is a defense against copyright infringement, it has nothing to do with trademark infringement. The relevant test here would probably be substantial likelihood of confusion.
I don't personally find it confusing, but I'm probably not an average person. I think "Facebook('s) X" is the much more common formulation for branded apps, and it's very common to call something "Cleaner/Dark/Accessible <Brand>" to indicate that your extension is a skin of that site. I'd say it's a borderline case, to be charitable, and changing it to "Cleaner - for Facebook", while more confusing about what it does, it's almost certainly safe.
But the point of the article seems to be that there is no feedback on how to resolve this from Google's side, so it's not like the author can go to court over this to adjudicate the dispute, you just get a chilling effect where Facebook et al can (ab)use to stymie people doing things they don't like.
- deanclatworthy 10y agoIANAL but.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use_(U.S._trademark_law) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use_(U.S._trademark_law... I have personally been working at a company where we had a problem with this. We were providing reviews of companies' websites, and therefore had to use their name and trademark. It was tricky legal ground for us to do this and we were challenged a few times.
- x1798DE 10y agoFair enough, I did not realize there was a different concept called that in trademark law. I still don't understand why you think it's absurd that he would assert such a defense, though. The article you linked clearly states that nominative use is actually encouraged by US trademark law. It seems a no brainer that you'd be able to specify the platform that your product works with.
- deanclatworthy 10y agoThe main problem here is that the author has created a product, which is harmful to the company in question whilst using their trademark. Generally courts don't like that.