3 ms·
> 53 is obligated to enforce their Trademark and the letter to Facebook is a manifestation of that obligation. But the open letter is not. A simple C&D would h
by seandougall 13y ago
> 53 is obligated to enforce their Trademark and the letter to Facebook is a manifestation of that obligation.
But the open letter is not. A simple C&D would have protected them; publishing it is purely about marketing.
- wavesplash 13y agoAgreed, seems an intentional move from the marketing playbook: If goliath gets news, pick a public fight when you're David. A very cheap investment for that level of exposure.