TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Facebook is trying to register BOOK as trademark in Europe

249 点作者 jwildeboer超过 5 年前

23 条评论

Lio超过 5 年前
As a cycling fan we&#x27;ve had a few of these sorts of shady cases where people try to take a pre-existing term, trademark it and then threaten to sue people legitimately using it.<p>Recent examples that have amused me include when Specialized Bicycle Components released a bike named after the French town of Roubaix and its famous bike race on cobbled roads... then proceeded to start threatening other businesses also named after the town.<p>Or the company Peloton Interactive Inc which named its indoor spinning product after the commonly used name for a group of cyclists &quot;peloton&quot;... and then proceeded to start threatening bloggers for using the term to describe groups of cyclists.<p>What&#x27;s particularly funny about the peloton case is that some other outfit in California is claiming a trademark on the term &quot;spinning&quot; to describe people indoors using static spin bikes... and has proceeded to start threatening small gyms for using that term.<p>Not sure if this is known as trademark trolling or not but I&#x27;m going to quietly trademark that term and start sending out threatening letters just in case.
评论 #20986351 未加载
评论 #20984570 未加载
评论 #20987239 未加载
评论 #20987229 未加载
paozac超过 5 年前
Ten years ago I developed a local rock climbing database called Climbook. Small website (~1000 users), no ads, no money involved. Facebook has spent the last 3 years suing the owner, saying it&#x27;s a trademark violation. The first two rounds at court rejected facebook claims, now they&#x27;re up for a third. Horrible people.
评论 #20985297 未加载
评论 #20984912 未加载
jordigh超过 5 年前
Whenever these trademark stories come up, everyone seems to get angry without trying to bother to understand how trademarks work. They think that they&#x27;re like copyrights, that trademarks require originality or disallow all forms of copying or something like that. I&#x27;m generally in favour of trademarks and I don&#x27;t think trademarking common words is as problematic as most people think.<p>When some word is trademarked, it doesn&#x27;t mean nobody else is allowed to say that word. I can write all day and all night about windows, apples, and lifts without having to get lawyers in my face about it. And if the lawyers do come, they might just request that I acknowledge the trademarks that I was using in a way that could confuse consumers.<p>You don&#x27;t need to defend everyone else&#x27;s trademarks on your own. If you want to generically say to &quot;google&quot; as a verb for any kind of search, go right ahead. It&#x27;s Google&#x27;s job to defend that trademark, not yours, and I think they may well lose that fight some day.<p>Trademarks allow common, dictionary words. There&#x27;s no requirement for a trademark to be original or creative. All it has to be is distinctive. I can call software &quot;Windows&quot; and I can call a music producer &quot;Apple&quot;. Generic words are usually only disallowed as trademarks when they are used to generically describe the thing under commerce. Facebook couldn&#x27;t become a bookseller with the trademark &quot;book&quot;, for example. (Little known fact, though, &quot;facebook&quot; itself <i>was</i> a common word, referring to college-provided printed books with fellow classmates&#x27; photos on them. I assume since no one is making those anymore, or because Facebook never produced printed facebooks, they now can elude any accusations of genericism.)<p>The test for trademark infringement is, are you using the trademark in a way that a reasonable consumer could be confused that you&#x27;re selling the same thing as what someone else has under the same trademark? I don&#x27;t think anyone has been referring to all social networking sites as &quot;books&quot;, thereby invalidating the claim that Facebook has a valid trademark on &quot;book&quot;.<p>Please, try to understand trademarks. One of my pet peeves with people who lump them under &quot;intellectual property&quot; is that they think that trademarks are somewhat similar to copyright or patents, but these are all very different laws with different purposes, histories, and ways of being defended and infringed. It doesn&#x27;t all just mean &quot;reproduction is disallowed&quot;.
评论 #20984325 未加载
评论 #20983831 未加载
评论 #20983907 未加载
评论 #20983926 未加载
评论 #20985811 未加载
评论 #20984398 未加载
评论 #20987351 未加载
评论 #20984489 未加载
评论 #20985579 未加载
评论 #20985433 未加载
Angostura超过 5 年前
I suppose its worth noting that the company is trying to trademark them in Class 9:<p>Class 9<p>Scientific, nautical, surveying, photographic, cinematographic, optical, weighing, measuring, signalling, checking (supervision), life-saving and teaching apparatus and instruments; apparatus and instruments for conducting, switching, transforming, accumulating, regulating or controlling electricity; apparatus for recording, transmission or reproduction of sound or images; magnetic data carriers, recording discs; automatic vending machines and mechanisms for coin-operated apparatus; cash registers, calculating machines, data processing equipment and computers; fire-extinguishing apparatus.<p>Explanatory Note<p>This Class includes, in particular: – apparatus and instruments for scientific research in laboratories; – apparatus and instruments for controlling ships, such as apparatus and instruments, for measuring and for transmitting orders; – the following electrical apparatus and instruments: (a) certain electrothermic tools and apparatus, such as electric soldering irons, electric flat irons which, if they were not electric, would belong to Class 8; (b) apparatus and devices which, if not electrical, would be listed in various classes, i.e., electrically heated clothing, cigar-lighters for automobiles; – protractors; – punched card office machines; – amusement apparatus adapted for use with television receivers only; – all computer programs and software regardless of recording media or means of dissemination, that is, software recorded on magnetic media or downloaded from a remote computer network. This Class does not include, in particular: – the following electrical apparatus and instruments: (a) electromechanical apparatus for the kitchen (grinders and mixers for foodstuffs, fruit presses, electrical coffee mills, etc.), and certain other apparatus and instruments driven by an electrical motor, all coming under Class 7; (b) electric razors and clippers (hand instruments) (Cl. 8); (c) electric toothbrushes and combs (Cl. 21); (d) electrical apparatus for space heating or for the heating of liquids, for cooking, ventilating, etc. (Cl. 11); – clocks and watches and other chronometric instruments (Cl. 14); – control clocks (Cl. 14).
评论 #20984269 未加载
jwildeboer超过 5 年前
Facebook is trying to register BOOK as a word mark at the EUIPO (EU Intellectual Property Office). The application is &quot;under examination&quot;.<p>This means that EUIPO decided this application meets the minimum requirements and has actually assigned an examiner to this instead of refusing the application as it is IMHO too generic.
评论 #20983313 未加载
OliverJones超过 5 年前
Hmm. Johannes Gutenberg is a little ahead of them, 580 years ahead of them to be exact.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Johannes_Gutenberg" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Johannes_Gutenberg</a><p>They were called codices (plural of codex) back then, though.<p>I hope EU uses this application for a few laffs, then denies it.<p>What&#x27;s next? Will they tried to register FRIEND and LIKE as wordmarks? How about &quot;FAKE NEWS&quot;?
评论 #20983596 未加载
评论 #20984073 未加载
nhebb超过 5 年前
Ohio State University recently tried to trademark the word &quot;The&quot;. Thankfully they were denied.
评论 #20983741 未加载
评论 #20985963 未加载
blackbrokkoli超过 5 年前
Everybody here is dismissing the idea that business could be affected because <i>book stores</i> are in some kind of other category - what about tech and software like<p>book2: language learning platform<p>Galaxy Book2: Samsung Product<p>book.com: Barnes &amp; Nobles URL<p>duelingbook.com: Yu-Gi-Oh! Simulator<p>books24.in: Online Billing<p>book24.ru: Web book store<p>bookweb: American bestseller association<p>...<p>I understand the idea of trademarks and would not call it a bad one - it makes sense that companies want to protect their name from direct copycats in the same sector. It is fair that some companies protect deviations from their actual name, too (Twitter, tweets. Microsoft Windows 10, Win10). But nobody calls &quot;Facebook&quot; &quot;book&quot; and it&#x27;s not like they have a palette of products with the word in it, like iPhone&#x2F;iPad&#x2F;iOS or something. If somebody can explain how they&#x27;re possibly acting in good faith here please elaborate, but I hope they get shut down, especially since it is well established that megacorps can just keep bullying regarding trademarks and the like, even if they are clearly wrong [0].<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;nissan.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;nissan.com&#x2F;</a>
szczepano超过 5 年前
Trademark is evil same is with patent and copyright. It&#x27;s just a corporate tool to gain free money from work of people who passed away long time ago. Those tools have one purpose - stop innovation and progress for years.
评论 #20987407 未加载
ksangeelee超过 5 年前
I recently registered &#x27;twitbook.uk&#x27; when the .uk TLD opened for general registrations, with the intention of running a satirical social network that would blatantly ask for personal information, allow open bidding to access the data, and provide features such as &#x27;make me angry&#x27; or &#x27;validate my opinions&#x27;. Just for fun of course, no real information would be solicited or sold.<p>I wonder if such a site would be considered a violation of this trademark, were it to be granted.
评论 #20984684 未加载
评论 #20984246 未加载
评论 #20985464 未加载
评论 #20984327 未加载
onetimemanytime超过 5 年前
Nothing beats the $6 Million &quot;We&quot; trademark.
评论 #20983463 未加载
评论 #20983378 未加载
评论 #20983819 未加载
notkaiho超过 5 年前
Given the umpteen categories they have this application applying to, what would their purpose for doing this be? To register &quot;FACE&quot; and &quot;BOOK&quot; together?
评论 #20983157 未加载
zozbot234超过 5 年前
Amazon might take issue with that.
评论 #20983377 未加载
marapuru超过 5 年前
Can someone explain to me what the implications of this trademark could be? Would that mean that a store that sells books and would have the word Book in their logo or brand could expect a lawsuit?<p>I&#x27;m not that familiar with trademarks and such.
评论 #20983287 未加载
评论 #20986355 未加载
mirimir超过 5 年前
Context: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dictionary.com&#x2F;e&#x2F;facebooktrademark&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dictionary.com&#x2F;e&#x2F;facebooktrademark&#x2F;</a>
kjar超过 5 年前
How does this pass the straight face test. The proposition is insane, I hope I wake up and this is all a fever dream.
评论 #20983569 未加载
artursapek超过 5 年前
Shout out to Barnes and Noble, owners of book.com :D I hope Zuck doesn&#x27;t try to harass them next.
pentae超过 5 年前
Seems just like lawyers doing lawyer things. People always read headlines like this and imagine Zuck sitting around a conference table with a bunch of his underlings cackling about their next big evil plot, but I bet he doesn&#x27;t even know about this it&#x27;s just their legal team doing what they&#x27;ve been paid to do - protect their trademark as much as possible.
评论 #20983993 未加载
schappim超过 5 年前
This is too close to home! My company is being sued by a company claiming the suffix KEY.
sbfeibish超过 5 年前
Noobs should become familiar with ICANN, WIPO, the US trademark database (TESS) at (uspto.gov), GDPR (European Union), and the European Union&#x27;s trademark database ( <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;euipo.europa.eu&#x2F;eSearch&#x2F;#details&#x2F;trademarks&#x2F;018075708" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;euipo.europa.eu&#x2F;eSearch&#x2F;#details&#x2F;trademarks&#x2F;01807570...</a> ). As well as the rules for obtaining a trademark or patent. I hope Facebook isn&#x27;t obtaining a work mark trademark. Hopefully, only a design mark. Along with the words &quot;NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE &quot;GAME&quot; APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN&quot;. Book is a generic word and doesn&#x27;t show source. The EU shouldn&#x27;t give Facebook an exclusive right to use book. Steve Feibish (book.us)
评论 #20995122 未加载
stuaxo超过 5 年前
Can&#x27;t they just fuck off?
nathancahill超过 5 年前
&quot;It&#x27;s cleaner&quot;
tabtab超过 5 年前
sueBook.com :-)
评论 #20985900 未加载