3 ms·

While I am not a fan of Facebook/Meta, I actually hope that they do not lose this case. If you want to name your company after a word that is in common usage, t

While I am not a fan of Facebook/Meta, I actually hope that they do not lose this case. If you want to name your company after a word that is in common usage, then you should have to deal with the fact that others may use the same word for their own purposes. JP Morgan seems like a name that hardly limits anyone trying to name their company. Apple or Meta are just words in common usage.

augstein 4y ago
Since it is such a common and useful word, I hope Facebook looses this case, as I would find it sad if that word is associated with their company by most people for the foreseeable future.
SahAssar 4y ago
Apple Computer still paid $80,000 to Apple Corps [1] even though it was 2 decades before they entered the music space. I don't think apple is a good example for your point. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer#1978%E2%80%931981 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer#1...
SoftTalker 4y ago
There was a spat between Domino's Pizza and Domino Sugar. For a while, Domino's Pizza had to use their full name, not just "Domino's", in advertising and even when they answered the phone. That seems to have changed, so maybe some new agreement was reached.
thr0wawayf00 4y ago
Their argument hinges on the fact that both companies operate in the VR space, and I agree with Meta.is here. Trademark law is pretty clear about protecting a brand name within a given market. "Apple" and "Meta" are just words, yes, but if a second computer company named "Apple" were to appear, this would pretty clearly infringe on the Apple trademark, as opposed to say Apple T-Shirt Company.
- joshmanders 4y ago
  > "Apple" and "Meta" are just words, yes, but if a second computer company named "Apple" were to appear, this would pretty clearly infringe on the Apple trademark, as opposed to say Apple T-Shirt Company. Which is exactly why Apple was called Apple Computers, Inc for a long time, because Apple already existed in computer space and Apple Computers was constantly sued by the original Apple until they finally came to an agreement and the original Apple gave the trademark to Apple Computers.
  - pyuser583 4y ago
    I thought the “other Apple” existed in the music space. Which wasn’t a problem, until Itunes.
    - rpdillon 4y ago
      Yes, this was my recollection as well. I'm thinking of the dispute with the Beatles[0], but there may be another. [0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
pacetherace 4y ago
Well then good luck trying to start a new company called Apple or Meta.
jrm4 4y ago
Broadly, though - trademark law specifically makes note of how "evocative" the particular word is. Which is to say, "Apple" for computers is more permissible than "Apple" for e.g. a food company. Not sure where I'd put "Meta" here though, it's so generic for anything.

augstein 4y ago

Since it is such a common and useful word, I hope Facebook looses this case, as I would find it sad if that word is associated with their company by most people for the foreseeable future.

SahAssar 4y ago

Apple Computer still paid $80,000 to Apple Corps [1] even though it was 2 decades before they entered the music space. I don't think apple is a good example for your point. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer#1978%E2%80%931981 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer#1...

SoftTalker 4y ago

There was a spat between Domino's Pizza and Domino Sugar. For a while, Domino's Pizza had to use their full name, not just "Domino's", in advertising and even when they answered the phone. That seems to have changed, so maybe some new agreement was reached.

thr0wawayf00 4y ago

Their argument hinges on the fact that both companies operate in the VR space, and I agree with Meta.is here. Trademark law is pretty clear about protecting a brand name within a given market. "Apple" and "Meta" are just words, yes, but if a second computer company named "Apple" were to appear, this would pretty clearly infringe on the Apple trademark, as opposed to say Apple T-Shirt Company.

joshmanders 4y ago
> "Apple" and "Meta" are just words, yes, but if a second computer company named "Apple" were to appear, this would pretty clearly infringe on the Apple trademark, as opposed to say Apple T-Shirt Company. Which is exactly why Apple was called Apple Computers, Inc for a long time, because Apple already existed in computer space and Apple Computers was constantly sued by the original Apple until they finally came to an agreement and the original Apple gave the trademark to Apple Computers.
- pyuser583 4y ago
  I thought the “other Apple” existed in the music space. Which wasn’t a problem, until Itunes.
  - rpdillon 4y ago
    Yes, this was my recollection as well. I'm thinking of the dispute with the Beatles[0], but there may be another. [0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer

pacetherace 4y ago

Well then good luck trying to start a new company called Apple or Meta.

jrm4 4y ago

Broadly, though - trademark law specifically makes note of how "evocative" the particular word is. Which is to say, "Apple" for computers is more permissible than "Apple" for e.g. a food company. Not sure where I'd put "Meta" here though, it's so generic for anything.