3 ms·

Wonder how this affects Apple's facetime?

arb99 13y ago
I've actually talked to people about facetime and they've assumed I was talking about some video feature on facebook. People do get confused by it. Facebook is so big anything that starts with Face is just assumed to be related to facebook by some people.
- darkarmani 13y ago
  It's product confusion that matters. Facebook doesn't have video, so it shouldn't matter. Facebook doesn't really have email, so i'm not sure how they claim it is confusing. No one says, "go sign up for email on facemail, oh i mean facebook."
  - DanBC 13y ago
    In this case there is Facebook (huge, very well known) and someone else (not so huge, not so well known) so it seems obvious to me that there's a chance for confusion. People are quoting the 36%, but do we know what the other two 3rds said?
  - jasonlotito 13y ago
    Except there are news articles about Facebook's email, as referenced in the report.
  - thinkcomp 13y ago
    Incorrect on two counts. It's the international classification code overlap that matters, and likelihood of confusion, not product confusion. There could be no actual confusion here because the FACEMAIL trademark was filed on an intent-to-use basis. And Facebook does have video features. https://www.facebook.com/videocalling/ https://www.facebook.com/videocalling/
qq66 13y ago
Apple has legal resources equivalent to Facebook's. There's no reason to believe that the outcome would be the same.
- ihsw 13y ago
  This is a sad state of affairs, and it's even more worrying that this can be applied universally. Enron's disgraced CEO Jeffrey Skilling is receiving an early release from jail due to his promise not to appeal his conviction anymore -- effectively buying his way out of jail.
  - Wingman4l7 13y ago
    Wow... he badgered the courts into letting him go? When Jim Bell tried that, they just slapped him with "harassment and stalking of federal agents" and stuck him back in jail.
jeena 13y ago
I wonder how Apple got around the problems with their name being the same as the record label. I somewhere heard that they got the permission to use it if they promise not to enter the music business. ... which they did with the iPod.
- omra 13y ago
  Apple Corps v Apple Computer. Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
- dtparr 13y ago
  I'm unsure if you legitimately don't know or are being sarcastic, but if it's the former, Wikipedia has a decent write-up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v._Apple_Computer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v._Apple_Computer
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
rlpb 13y ago
The "face" part of FaceTime seems quite directly descriptive of what FaceTime does to me. I know that descriptive names cannot be trademarked. Perhaps that has some bearing on this?

arb99 13y ago

I've actually talked to people about facetime and they've assumed I was talking about some video feature on facebook. People do get confused by it. Facebook is so big anything that starts with Face is just assumed to be related to facebook by some people.

darkarmani 13y ago
It's product confusion that matters. Facebook doesn't have video, so it shouldn't matter. Facebook doesn't really have email, so i'm not sure how they claim it is confusing. No one says, "go sign up for email on facemail, oh i mean facebook."
- DanBC 13y ago
  In this case there is Facebook (huge, very well known) and someone else (not so huge, not so well known) so it seems obvious to me that there's a chance for confusion. People are quoting the 36%, but do we know what the other two 3rds said?
- jasonlotito 13y ago
  Except there are news articles about Facebook's email, as referenced in the report.
- thinkcomp 13y ago
  Incorrect on two counts. It's the international classification code overlap that matters, and likelihood of confusion, not product confusion. There could be no actual confusion here because the FACEMAIL trademark was filed on an intent-to-use basis. And Facebook does have video features. https://www.facebook.com/videocalling/ https://www.facebook.com/videocalling/

qq66 13y ago

Apple has legal resources equivalent to Facebook's. There's no reason to believe that the outcome would be the same.

ihsw 13y ago
This is a sad state of affairs, and it's even more worrying that this can be applied universally. Enron's disgraced CEO Jeffrey Skilling is receiving an early release from jail due to his promise not to appeal his conviction anymore -- effectively buying his way out of jail.
- Wingman4l7 13y ago
  Wow... he badgered the courts into letting him go? When Jim Bell tried that, they just slapped him with "harassment and stalking of federal agents" and stuck him back in jail.

jeena 13y ago

I wonder how Apple got around the problems with their name being the same as the record label. I somewhere heard that they got the permission to use it if they promise not to enter the music business. ... which they did with the iPod.

omra 13y ago
Apple Corps v Apple Computer. Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
dtparr 13y ago
I'm unsure if you legitimately don't know or are being sarcastic, but if it's the former, Wikipedia has a decent write-up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v._Apple_Computer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v._Apple_Computer
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

rlpb 13y ago

The "face" part of FaceTime seems quite directly descriptive of what FaceTime does to me. I know that descriptive names cannot be trademarked. Perhaps that has some bearing on this?