It's a shame how obvious they're working their corporate bullying cards simply because of money. Imagine if I created a product called Google and tried to sue Google for it. That would be ridiculous, right? Well, that's what Facebook is doing, just with money.
It's not what Facebook is doing. The company has owned the trademark for over a decade, and Facebook is trying to strong arm them into giving it up.
This is also in the UK where they somewhat stand up to companies like Facebook. McDonald's lost their trademark for the Big Mac for trying to do this exact same thing.
Maybe I didn't convey what I'm saying well. Facebook is attempting to take a name because they have money. Laws don't really apply to them, they seem to think, and it's because of their bullying and their money.
Came across differently in your initial comment.
Someone should start an alternate DNS root and then auction off facebook.com within their platform.
Also, Wendy's had this issue as well in Europe, but their issue was about their actual company name.
hahaha i didnt know this happened. Supermac FTW!
Eh, the UK isn't in the best situation, in terms of big tech. If anything, most FAANG companies have got away without paying any tax here for over a decade because the alternative is they ship all of their jobs elsewhere, and the UK tech scene implodes.
I think a UK court would likely stand up for the British company, as they should, but I would expect Meta to be allowed to throw their weight around a little.
Facebook isn’t suing Threads. The longtime trademark holder is suing Facebook.
Right, I know
Okay, pointing out the analogy of "Imagine if I created a product called Google and tried to sue Google for it [...] Well, that’s what Facebook is doing" doesn't match this situation.
Facebook created a product called Threads and is attempting to bully Threads Software into taking their name. I was creating a hypothetical situation about how most small companies can't just steal a company trademark, because it's rightfully someone else's. However, if you are a larger company and, have enough money, and have shit ethics, then you can just kinda... ignore that, and for some reason, the US is happy to let wallets write the law.
They did this with Meta, too.
I agree, that is what they're doing. My only point was they're being sued, not suing someone. They just took the name and were ignoring the other company that was already using it.
Didn't they pull the same shit back when they changed the company name to Meta?
Yeah.
Fuck I wish my old elementary school friends and parents wouldn't use Messenger. I'm eternslly stuck on that platform.
Does Whatsapp connect to messenger like Instagram does? Not sure it's any better though, since it's still owned by Meta. I wish I could get everyone on signal
No, WhatsApp doesn’t.
Does Signal do end to end encryption? That's why I use telegram.
Yeah, encryption and security is signal's whole thing. They even removed the ability to send SMS a while back because they were prioritizing security over all else. Def check it out
Gotcha, thanks.
Of course it does? That's like one of the main headlining features of both Signal and Telegram, and why people were looking at either instead of Whatsapp. And it was even louder than Telegram about it, since telegram uses (or used) a closed source encryption, while Signal was vocally using an Open Source encryption standard if I remember correctly.
i saw one person do something like this: messages JOIN ME ON SIGNAL(or anything not owned by Facebook and amazon) IF YOU DON'T WANT TO WELL WILL LOSE CONTACT SO PLEASE JOIN ME
im not sure on how well this will work but maybe exclude you're family but try to get them to atleast WhatsApp but even better a private messager also consider xmpp/jabber and matrix for jabber i recommend calyx institute jabber server
try to get them to atleast WhatsApp
WhatsApp is also owned by Facebook, so switching to that from Messenger is a bit like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
You can trial out a new platform called beeper.com
It allows you to add all your chats to 1 platform. It's in selected participants mode currently.
Ahh thank you for the Beeper reminder! I'm still on the waitlist tho. :(
Yh same :-(
You're not stuck. Just leave, and make people talk to you over Signal. If they're not trying to talk to me on Signal or Matrix, I will never see it. This not only got me off of services like Messenger, but also showed who gave enough of a shit about me to go through Signal's simple setup.
I predict that years will go by and it'll still be called Threads.
Just like Meta is a stolen name. Facebook doesn’t care.
That's why the UK company is using a cease-and-desist approach, which apparently is an option in the UK.
Absolutely zero care. Too much money gushing in.
I'd just sue em for a bunch of money and then license the name to them for a bunch more, and the website for a bunch more...
enjoy being tied up in court until you run out of money and they win by default
Can I sue for my legal fees or negotaite a percentage of winnings with my lawyer?
Only if the lawyer is convinced they can win it.
I'm good at convincing.
So are lawyers. It's their job.
Good that's why I hired 'em.
I wouldn't be surprised if FB/Meta tried to just settle out of court and pay them off.
"That'll be one billion quid, please."
They will. This was most likely planned by their legal team in advance, will cost Facebook a negligible amount compared to their revenue and marked as a “risk.” And when they settle it will be a planned business expense, like a fine
What would it have cost Facebook to come up with a different name?
~$1,000,000,000,000 USD, which is why they're trying to do it the "easy way"
The legal fees alone while it gets dragged out in court will definitely hurt the smaller company.
That's the strategy, of course. Throw a ton of lawyers at it and hope the other company just gives up.
Yeah they don’t even need to hire a law firm. They pay millions of dollars in retainer every year to keep lawyers on staff, so this is just someone’s day job to go through the motions
The company has said that they've spent a decade building their "brand" under that name. So, if they're pushing for a big payout, they intend it to be gargantuan rather than the usual payoff. Changing their name would essentially be starting over in some ways. And the confusion they claim as their reason for action is a legit thing.
I'm not saying that isn't their goal behind the scenes, but FB tried to buy the name and failed, so I have a feeling they aren't looking for the usual quiet payoff that's the goal of that type of action.
ITT:...
...wait why did I just get kicked off facebook.
Eh I don't think they have much of a claim here. Threads is a super common word in software and Facebook can so what they want with their own platform.
The problem is that the company doing this is in messaging. It isn't a direct competitor, but it's a legit proposition, as per the analysis lawyers have made. It's big enough news that the usual outlets have chimed in, and the gist has been that a suit would have standing
It's a shame how obvious they're working their corporate bullying cards simply because of money. Imagine if I created a product called Google and tried to sue Google for it. That would be ridiculous, right? Well, that's what Facebook is doing, just with money.
It's not what Facebook is doing. The company has owned the trademark for over a decade, and Facebook is trying to strong arm them into giving it up.
This is also in the UK where they somewhat stand up to companies like Facebook. McDonald's lost their trademark for the Big Mac for trying to do this exact same thing.
Maybe I didn't convey what I'm saying well. Facebook is attempting to take a name because they have money. Laws don't really apply to them, they seem to think, and it's because of their bullying and their money.
Came across differently in your initial comment.
Someone should start an alternate DNS root and then auction off facebook.com within their platform.
Also, Wendy's had this issue as well in Europe, but their issue was about their actual company name.
hahaha i didnt know this happened. Supermac FTW!
Eh, the UK isn't in the best situation, in terms of big tech. If anything, most FAANG companies have got away without paying any tax here for over a decade because the alternative is they ship all of their jobs elsewhere, and the UK tech scene implodes.
I think a UK court would likely stand up for the British company, as they should, but I would expect Meta to be allowed to throw their weight around a little.
Facebook isn’t suing Threads. The longtime trademark holder is suing Facebook.
Right, I know
Okay, pointing out the analogy of "Imagine if I created a product called Google and tried to sue Google for it [...] Well, that’s what Facebook is doing" doesn't match this situation.
Facebook created a product called Threads and is attempting to bully Threads Software into taking their name. I was creating a hypothetical situation about how most small companies can't just steal a company trademark, because it's rightfully someone else's. However, if you are a larger company and, have enough money, and have shit ethics, then you can just kinda... ignore that, and for some reason, the US is happy to let wallets write the law.
They did this with Meta, too.
I agree, that is what they're doing. My only point was they're being sued, not suing someone. They just took the name and were ignoring the other company that was already using it.
I think the part that is missing is “imagine if I were a billion dollar company and I…”
Didn't they pull the same shit back when they changed the company name to Meta?
Yeah.
Fuck I wish my old elementary school friends and parents wouldn't use Messenger. I'm eternslly stuck on that platform.
Does Whatsapp connect to messenger like Instagram does? Not sure it's any better though, since it's still owned by Meta. I wish I could get everyone on signal
No, WhatsApp doesn’t.
Does Signal do end to end encryption? That's why I use telegram.
Yeah, encryption and security is signal's whole thing. They even removed the ability to send SMS a while back because they were prioritizing security over all else. Def check it out
Gotcha, thanks.
Of course it does? That's like one of the main headlining features of both Signal and Telegram, and why people were looking at either instead of Whatsapp. And it was even louder than Telegram about it, since telegram uses (or used) a closed source encryption, while Signal was vocally using an Open Source encryption standard if I remember correctly.
i saw one person do something like this: messages JOIN ME ON SIGNAL(or anything not owned by Facebook and amazon) IF YOU DON'T WANT TO WELL WILL LOSE CONTACT SO PLEASE JOIN ME
im not sure on how well this will work but maybe exclude you're family but try to get them to atleast WhatsApp but even better a private messager also consider xmpp/jabber and matrix for jabber i recommend calyx institute jabber server
WhatsApp is also owned by Facebook, so switching to that from Messenger is a bit like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Telegram or Signal. Whatsapp is owned by Meta
WhatsApp is facebook, it's not an improvement in the slightest
You can trial out a new platform called beeper.com
It allows you to add all your chats to 1 platform. It's in selected participants mode currently.
Ahh thank you for the Beeper reminder! I'm still on the waitlist tho. :(
Yh same :-(
You're not stuck. Just leave, and make people talk to you over Signal. If they're not trying to talk to me on Signal or Matrix, I will never see it. This not only got me off of services like Messenger, but also showed who gave enough of a shit about me to go through Signal's simple setup.
I predict that years will go by and it'll still be called Threads.
Just like Meta is a stolen name. Facebook doesn’t care.
That's why the UK company is using a cease-and-desist approach, which apparently is an option in the UK.
Absolutely zero care. Too much money gushing in.
I'd just sue em for a bunch of money and then license the name to them for a bunch more, and the website for a bunch more...
enjoy being tied up in court until you run out of money and they win by default
Can I sue for my legal fees or negotaite a percentage of winnings with my lawyer?
Only if the lawyer is convinced they can win it.
I'm good at convincing.
So are lawyers. It's their job.
Good that's why I hired 'em.
I wouldn't be surprised if FB/Meta tried to just settle out of court and pay them off.
"That'll be one billion quid, please."
They will. This was most likely planned by their legal team in advance, will cost Facebook a negligible amount compared to their revenue and marked as a “risk.” And when they settle it will be a planned business expense, like a fine
What would it have cost Facebook to come up with a different name?
~$1,000,000,000,000 USD, which is why they're trying to do it the "easy way"
The legal fees alone while it gets dragged out in court will definitely hurt the smaller company.
That's the strategy, of course. Throw a ton of lawyers at it and hope the other company just gives up.
Yeah they don’t even need to hire a law firm. They pay millions of dollars in retainer every year to keep lawyers on staff, so this is just someone’s day job to go through the motions
The company has said that they've spent a decade building their "brand" under that name. So, if they're pushing for a big payout, they intend it to be gargantuan rather than the usual payoff. Changing their name would essentially be starting over in some ways. And the confusion they claim as their reason for action is a legit thing.
I'm not saying that isn't their goal behind the scenes, but FB tried to buy the name and failed, so I have a feeling they aren't looking for the usual quiet payoff that's the goal of that type of action.
Isn't this just business news?
It is this is not technology news
Threads isn't even a good name lol
Never download the Meta Threads.
Delete all meta accounts
Take the L, Facebook!
ITT:...
...wait why did I just get kicked off facebook.
Eh I don't think they have much of a claim here. Threads is a super common word in software and Facebook can so what they want with their own platform.
The problem is that the company doing this is in messaging. It isn't a direct competitor, but it's a legit proposition, as per the analysis lawyers have made. It's big enough news that the usual outlets have chimed in, and the gist has been that a suit would have standing