Comments on: Challenge to Facebook’s Trademark http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2008/04/17/challenge-to-facebooks-trademark/ Information, Law, and the Law of Information Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:40:16 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: zeno http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2008/04/17/challenge-to-facebooks-trademark/comment-page-1/#comment-51929 zeno Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:27:32 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2008/04/17/challenge-to-facebooks-trademark/#comment-51929 I don't quite understand the trademark distinctions, but on the prior generic use front, I'd point you to <a href="http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=357292" rel="nofollow">this Crimson article</a>, with a lot of quotes along the lines of: <blockquote>“There is a project internally with computer services to create a facebook,” Davis said. “We’ve been in touch with the Undergraduate Council, and this is a very high priority for the College. We have every intention of completing the facebook by the end of the spring semester.”</blockquote> Zuckerberg willingly acknowledges the genesis of the term. Of course, as you've said, at this point most every college student associates "Facebook" with the ".com", and many colleges (including the one I attended) have changed the name of their freshman facebook to something else precisely because of this potential for confusion. I don’t quite understand the trademark distinctions, but on the prior generic use front, I’d point you to this Crimson article, with a lot of quotes along the lines of:

“There is a project internally with computer services to create a facebook,” Davis said. “We’ve been in touch with the Undergraduate Council, and this is a very high priority for the College. We have every intention of completing the facebook by the end of the spring semester.”

Zuckerberg willingly acknowledges the genesis of the term. Of course, as you’ve said, at this point most every college student associates “Facebook” with the “.com”, and many colleges (including the one I attended) have changed the name of their freshman facebook to something else precisely because of this potential for confusion.

]]> By: Courtney http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2008/04/17/challenge-to-facebooks-trademark/comment-page-1/#comment-51925 Courtney Tue, 22 Apr 2008 14:53:22 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2008/04/17/challenge-to-facebooks-trademark/#comment-51925 If FACEBOOK is considered descriptive, I definitely think it has acquired secondary meaning. If FACEBOOK is considered descriptive, I definitely think it has acquired secondary meaning.

]]> By: Sally http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2008/04/17/challenge-to-facebooks-trademark/comment-page-1/#comment-51763 Sally Sun, 20 Apr 2008 20:56:34 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2008/04/17/challenge-to-facebooks-trademark/#comment-51763 Mr. Bambauer, I sincerely hope that you report on the Lexicon case now that there's been a trial (but don't rely on press reports to do so because they have been terrible). Maybe once all the transcripts are public? We as fans desperately need a rational legal mind to talk this out. There are summaries of the first two days in court on The Leaky Cauldron website but nothing yet on the third. Mr. Bambauer, I sincerely hope that you report on the Lexicon case now that there’s been a trial (but don’t rely on press reports to do so because they have been terrible). Maybe once all the transcripts are public? We as fans desperately need a rational legal mind to talk this out.

There are summaries of the first two days in court on The Leaky Cauldron website but nothing yet on the third.

]]> By: Michael Risch http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2008/04/17/challenge-to-facebooks-trademark/comment-page-1/#comment-51568 Michael Risch Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:55:33 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2008/04/17/challenge-to-facebooks-trademark/#comment-51568 I agree that it's likely not generic in web form (assuming there are social networking features). I was just saying that is the only argument that has any legs (and its legs are weak). I agree that it’s likely not generic in web form (assuming there are social networking features). I was just saying that is the only argument that has any legs (and its legs are weak).

]]> By: William McGeveran http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2008/04/17/challenge-to-facebooks-trademark/comment-page-1/#comment-51554 William McGeveran Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:56:16 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2008/04/17/challenge-to-facebooks-trademark/#comment-51554 Mike: Sure, generic trumps all. But I can't see FACEBOOK as generic. Maybe SOCIAL NETWORK would be generic. Mike: Sure, generic trumps all. But I can’t see FACEBOOK as generic. Maybe SOCIAL NETWORK would be generic.

]]> By: Michael Risch http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2008/04/17/challenge-to-facebooks-trademark/comment-page-1/#comment-51551 Michael Risch Fri, 18 Apr 2008 12:02:56 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2008/04/17/challenge-to-facebooks-trademark/#comment-51551 I agree that FACEBOOK seems to be suggestive rather than descriptive of the website and there is no doubt that secondary meaning has accrued even if it were descriptive. That said, if it were determined to be generic for any site or book that has faces, then secondary meaning would be irrelevant. (Not out of the realm of possibility - my old firm couldn't register computerlaw.com because it was supposedly generic, though we argued it was suggestive). I see that as the only way cancellation might occur here. I agree that FACEBOOK seems to be suggestive rather than descriptive of the website and there is no doubt that secondary meaning has accrued even if it were descriptive.

That said, if it were determined to be generic for any site or book that has faces, then secondary meaning would be irrelevant. (Not out of the realm of possibility – my old firm couldn’t register computerlaw.com because it was supposedly generic, though we argued it was suggestive). I see that as the only way cancellation might occur here.

]]>