Facebook To Own the Word "Face"

Dthief writes "The US Patent And Trademark Office has sent Facebook a Notice of Allowance, which means it will grant the 'Face' trademark to the popular social networking site. Facebook now has three months to pay an issue fee before they officially own the word. From the article: 'For all intents and purposes today's status update bodes well for Facebook's hold over 'face' usages in 'Telecommunication services, namely, providing online chat rooms and electronic bulletin boards for transmission of messages among computer users in the field of general interest and concerning social and entertainment subject matter, none primarily featuring or relating to motoring or to cars.''"

First "Book" and now "Face"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't they sue someone over the use of the word "Book" (teachersbook) or something like that? This was a common phrase to apply to a year book. This kind of stuff is just beyond me...nobody should be able to own common words or letters.

Re:AAAND LO!!!

[cappp]

Most of the complaints are arising out of ignorance of the law, and a little internet hyperbole thrown in for good measure. Facebook no more owns the word "face" than Microsoft owns "windows" or McDolands owns "big." The 1st Amendment and Fair Use standards still apply to trademark terms. What is being stopped here, however, is the specific use of a specific term in a specific instance. You're no longer allowed to create a social networking site using Face-, that's all. Hell, even that's not quite true - there are a number of legal routes to doing so if you wanted including challenging the trademark, Fair Use, concurrent use, geographic protections, different industry, and so on. The system is designed to protect consumers from deliberate confusion, and its a good one for all it's flaws. Sure it could do with a little revision but its equally important that people spend some time and actually understand the system they're slamming...inevitablly its not nearly as illogical, stupid, or flawed as some would have you believe.

There's a great comment on TFA [techcrunch.com] that really nails is. I'm reproducing it here for convenience:

What Facebook are trying to trademark is the use of the word "face" in electronic applications (Telecommunication as an alternative word for "online") offering social (i.e. facebook like) applications. This make a lot of sense. Just like many other generic terms used in a non trivial way. the word "face" is not descriptive in the way that "myface" describes (literally) an application where people may comment and interact socially. This is why also Apple's FaceTime will not breach the trademark, as it is using the word face literally (enabling the other side of the conversation to see your face) and not referring to the word Face in the non-dictionary meaning of it, which is attributed to facebook's phenomena (namely social networking). This doesn't give facebook the rights for the use of the word face for a face recognition software, or for other non related use. I personally agree that facebook should get the rights for the usage of the word face in the "social network" meaning, as they created this meaning, and protect them from people launching services named faceXXX or XXXface that may indicate relationship to facebook. This is just like caterpillar trademarking the word "cat" for construction and manufacturing equipment (but not getting rights for CatFeeder, or LolCats).

Re:No, not really

[DavidRawling]

I think the rage is more about the over-reaching grab for everything - it's not that they want "Facebook" they want Face{EVERYTHING} (and {EVERYTHING}book) - and these words are often used as part of a larger word or phrase, for example (just some normal words that are in use, let alone "created" words like facebook):

• faceplant
• face to face
• facecloth
• facedown
• faceless
• facelift
• facemask
• faceplate
• faceup
• FaceTime - hmm, where's the Apple lawsuit I wonder? - "Getting face time" has been in use long before facebook.

Let's *ace it, *ace is a pretty common word or syllable, and claiming otherwise is a bald-*aced lie. Same with *ook! LittleBlack*ook.com is probably in trouble (given Teach*ook is in court), the GoReadA*ook.org foundation is up *hit creek ... and where shall it stop?

facebook is a common noun

[Compaqt]

The nuttiest thing about this is that "facebook" is a common noun. It's not used in all areas as a synonym for "yearbook", but it is in some.

Before Facebook, a facebook [wiktionary.org] was simply a compilation of pictures of members of a class to allow them to get to know each other.

Basically, if you have money, there is a different (self-made) law for you. It's basically might makes right, but with only the threat of violence as opposed to actual bloodshed.

Re:First "Book" and now "Face"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey! We have the same name! My lawyer will be contacting you shortly...

Seriously, PTO... for fuck's sake!

Allow the FULL "Facebook" as a trademark, but disallow "face" or "book", as there are many years' worth of previous "art".

I mean, Jesus f'in' Christ... what's next? Apple trademarking "i"? MySpace trademarking "my" and "space"? Slashdot trademarking "slash" and "dot" (sorry, GnR/Animaniacs!)?

Fuckin' USPTO just got themselves Zuckerfucked...

Re:First "Book" and now "Face"?

[GameboyRMH]

Zuckerfuck: What social media does to the web, and human society.

Future history book:

In the mid 2000s, mankind was beginning to be Zuckerfucked. By 2015 the Zuckerfuckification was complete, and new words had to be invented for "face" and "book" to avoid licensing fees. Unfortunately it was impossible to spread the use of these words among the population without making them the property of Facebook or Twitter, leading to the current usage of "that thing between your chin and your hairline" and "bound set of pages." However Pepsi was still as delicious as ever. Drink Pepsi.