3 ms·

>If you don't like Facebook's actions then don't use it. In other words, "You're free to speak, as long as no one can hear you." Nice bait. Look at all your re

by danjoc 10y ago

>If you don't like Facebook's actions then don't use it. In other words, "You're free to speak, as long as no one can hear you." Nice bait. Look at all your replies. >Having open speech on Facebook's platform is not an inalienable right. So long as the government ensures that Facebook is the only platform via patent/copyright/trademark enforcement, I beg to differ. When I can build a Facebook clone of my own and not be sued out of existence for it [1], then you have a valid point. Until then, Facebook isn't greatly different from VKontakte or Renren. [1]http://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-sues-german-rival/ http://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-sues-german-rival/

briandear 10y ago
Trademark? Why would you need to violate trademarks? MySpace got crushed by FB -- IP and trademarks had nothing to do with it, unless you want to fool people into thinking that you were Facebook. Build your own system or come up with your own great idea. You don't need to copy Facebook any more than they had to copy MySpace. You just need to put in some original hard work and make it happen. It isn't Facebook's fault you can't come up with something better that people want to use. There's no patent on social networking. How would it be fair if you invested a billion dollars in code and marketing only to have someone come along and steal your code? You might not like patents, but they will help protect you and your great idea if you every execute on one. Facebook isn't stopping you from doing anything.
- danjoc 10y ago
  >Trademark? Why would you need to violate trademarks? This is a straw man argument. I didn't say violate trademarks. I said trademark enforcement. A small competitor can be wiped out easily with legal costs associated with an extended trademark battle in court. >Build your own system or come up with your own great idea. Same straw man. I don't have to violate patents to be sued out of existence. >There's no patent on social networking. This statement is categorically false. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=social+network+patent http://lmgtfy.com/?q=social+network+patent
  - Dylan16807 10y ago
    > I said trademark enforcement. A small competitor can be wiped out easily with legal costs associated with an extended trademark battle in court. Has anything like that ever happened? Someone starts a business and a competitor with a completely unrelated name wipes them out with a trademark battle?
    - danjoc 10y ago
      It's going to be hard to point to examples by definition because they were wiped out and nobody ever heard from them again. An example of this you may have heard of, but did not wipe out the company, was AstraZenica's suit against Dr. Reddy's over the purple color of a heartburn pill. http://www.wsj.com/articles/dr-reddys-blocked-from-selling-purple-heartburn-pill-after-astrazeneca-objections-1447162056 http://www.wsj.com/articles/dr-reddys-blocked-from-selling-p...
jessaustin 10y ago
Nice bait. Look at all your replies. Don't be a dick. We're having a conversation here. Lots of people in this very thread don't use Facebook.

by danjoc 10y ago

briandear 10y ago

Trademark? Why would you need to violate trademarks? MySpace got crushed by FB -- IP and trademarks had nothing to do with it, unless you want to fool people into thinking that you were Facebook. Build your own system or come up with your own great idea. You don't need to copy Facebook any more than they had to copy MySpace. You just need to put in some original hard work and make it happen. It isn't Facebook's fault you can't come up with something better that people want to use. There's no patent on social networking. How would it be fair if you invested a billion dollars in code and marketing only to have someone come along and steal your code? You might not like patents, but they will help protect you and your great idea if you every execute on one. Facebook isn't stopping you from doing anything.

danjoc 10y ago
>Trademark? Why would you need to violate trademarks? This is a straw man argument. I didn't say violate trademarks. I said trademark enforcement. A small competitor can be wiped out easily with legal costs associated with an extended trademark battle in court. >Build your own system or come up with your own great idea. Same straw man. I don't have to violate patents to be sued out of existence. >There's no patent on social networking. This statement is categorically false. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=social+network+patent http://lmgtfy.com/?q=social+network+patent
- Dylan16807 10y ago
  > I said trademark enforcement. A small competitor can be wiped out easily with legal costs associated with an extended trademark battle in court. Has anything like that ever happened? Someone starts a business and a competitor with a completely unrelated name wipes them out with a trademark battle?
  - danjoc 10y ago
    It's going to be hard to point to examples by definition because they were wiped out and nobody ever heard from them again. An example of this you may have heard of, but did not wipe out the company, was AstraZenica's suit against Dr. Reddy's over the purple color of a heartburn pill. http://www.wsj.com/articles/dr-reddys-blocked-from-selling-purple-heartburn-pill-after-astrazeneca-objections-1447162056 http://www.wsj.com/articles/dr-reddys-blocked-from-selling-p...

jessaustin 10y ago

Nice bait. Look at all your replies. Don't be a dick. We're having a conversation here. Lots of people in this very thread don't use Facebook.