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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Also, Wendy’s had this issue as well in Europe, but their issue was about their actual company name.
Someone should start an alternate DNS root and then auction off facebook.com within their platform.
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.
deleted by creator
I think the part that is missing is “imagine if I were a billion dollar company and I…”