3 ms·

I don't see how this is any different than a product named "Websites" or "Blogs" or "Comments". It's like a genericized trademark, except there was no trademark

I don't see how this is any different than a product named "Websites" or "Blogs" or "Comments". It's like a genericized trademark, except there was no trademark to begin with. There should be no trademark protection for companies which use existing words as their name, especially if the word describes their business. "Slack" as a software name is borderline; "Slacks" as a name of a clothing company is crazy.

airstrike 3y ago
This is being heavily downvoted but it raises a very valid point. Again IANAL but in my vague recollection from dealing with this years ago, if "thread" is such a commonplace word in describing message boards, then it is not protected in the same way that, say, "Twitter" is. It would be like trying to argue only my bakery can use the word "cake"