Steal Your Face: The Social Network's Latest Trademark Raises Eyebrows
"While it seems so bizarre that a company should have the right to trademark a word as common as 'Face' apparently the USPTO isn't at all disturbed," writes TechCrunch, which first reported the news.
As CNNMoney.com notes, "Patent lawyers had been skeptical that Facebook would be granted the trademark to such a generic word."
"When it comes to branding your product, there are a couple schools of thought," The Next Web writes. "One of them goes by the philosophy that you can never really have too much visibility. That ... is apparently the method of operation for Facebook."
"The trademark will be a powerful weapon for Facebook in disputes against third-party companies and services that try to leech off of Facebook's well-known brand," according to Vator News. "Unfortunately, one can also imagine it being used to instigate litigation against parties who use the word 'face' in their names just because it makes a lot of sense in describing social, people-to-people services."
Not content with the win, Facebook is also going after sites using the word "book," and "like."
In August, Facebook sued start-up site Teachbook.com -- which claims it is merely a teacher's community, according to CNNMoney.com. Last summer, Facebook also forced the travel site PlaceBook to change its name to TripTrace.
Meanwhile, "If Facebook is awarded a trademark on the word 'face,' it shouldn't interfere with Apple's mobile video calling service Facetime, since the Cupertino-based device maker has a trademark on that term itself," Inside Facebook writes.
0 comments on "Steal Your Face: The Social Network's Latest Trademark Raises Eyebrows".
Leave a Comment
Recent Around the Net In Online Marketing Articles
-
Google Glass Apps Adding Up May 17, 11:47 a.m.
In what has become a necessary step for any successful operating system, Google Glass is starting ... -
Groupon Drags Out CEO Search May 17, 11:46 a.m.
Speaking of Groupon, the deal site says it’s unlikely to name a permanent new CEO until ... -
Andrew Mason Plotting Next Company May 17, 11:44 a.m.
What’s Andrew Mason been up to since being booted from the top spot at Groupon? Well, ... -
Yahoo Kicking Tumblr's Tires May 17, 11:44 a.m.
Yahoo is reportedly considering partnering with, investing in, or buying Tumblr. “Sources said the talks were ... -
Google, NASA To Study A.I. With "Quantum Computer" May 16, 12:01 p.m.
Google and NASA are creating a laboratory to study artificial intelligence. Their focus, as The New ... -
Skift Closes $1 Seed Round May 16, noon
Skift -- the travel intelligence and news startup founded by Rafat Ali -- has closed $1.1 ... -
USA Network Vies For Social Media Control May 16, 11:59 a.m.
USA Network on Thursday is expected to debut a new Web and mobile platform that, as ... -
Microsoft, Google At Odds Over App Ads May 16, 11:58 a.m.
After Microsoft updated its own YouTube application for Windows Phone the other week, Google sent the ... -
Larry Page Explains Soft-Spokenness May 15, 10:30 a.m.
More than personal quirk or mere curiosity, Larry Page’s soft-spokenness has led some analysts to question ... -
Brightcove Bows Mobile Live-Streaming Tool May 15, 10:29 a.m.
Video distribution platform Brightcove is introducing a new module that is designed to help customers run ...


Common words like "apple" are trademarked, so why not "face" -- what's the difference? Indeed, Apple was reserved by Apple Records until Apple Computer wanted to use the word. The two companies finally agreed, provided that Apple Computer not get into the music business (an easy promise to make in the 1980s, before anyone dreamed of iTunes). Bad blood over that breach kept the Beatles music off of iTunes until very recently (when hardly anyone still cares about dinosaur rock).
This kind of nonsense is why people don't trust marketers.
What I want to know is who was the incompetent bureaucrat that authorized use of a common word in the first place?