General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMeta owns trademark for "X" used in social media apps ?
If true
Link to tweet
RT (re-xcreted?) :
Pluvious
(5,394 posts)dweller
(28,408 posts)Microsoft owns it since 2002
✌🏻
zuul
(14,704 posts)Doesnt really make sense to me, but thats what I read.
For gaming
✌🏻
XBox is owned by Microsoft.
Ms. Toad
(38,634 posts)dweller
(28,408 posts)Ms. Toad
(38,634 posts)is this one: https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/ImageAgent/ImageAgentProxy?getImage=87980831
The application was filed (and first use alleged by Microsoft) in 2017. It was assigned to Facebook in 2020, and to Meta in 2021.
I don't find any marks registered to xorg, x.org, or x.org foundation. (Not disputing that it existed, simply that if they were using X as a trademark no one registered it.)
Hermit-The-Prog
(36,631 posts)I don't think a trademark for a computer windowing display system and a trademark for a social media communications system would conflict with each other. Trademark is all about avoiding confusing consumers as to source, right?
Ms. Toad
(38,634 posts)for social media:
There is a lot more stuff there, most of which Musk seems to suggest he plans for X.con. But that's about as identical as you can get.
Microsoft filed the application on the basis of intent to use (in 2017), and the only specimen it provided in 2019 when it had to prove actual use, not just intent, was for Mixer - a gaming platform which includes social networking. The X in the middle of Mixer is what is registered.
(So the X which is a Microsoft>Facebook>Meta registered trademark is not for a computer windowing display system - it is for a social media platform. It is focused on gaming.) A possible defense is to prove that the goods and services claimed were described more broadly than were ever used - especially since it now seems to have been abandoned and never used by facebook/Meta. But that's not a clean defense.
Hermit-The-Prog
(36,631 posts)Even if the X window system had trademarked some x mark, it would not be in conflict with the trademark Meta holds because they're in different fields.
Ms. Toad
(38,634 posts)That mark sould have been considered during Meta's registration, and Meta's mark should not have been issued had it been in conflict with an existing registered trademark.
If not registered, the protection is much narrower (the geographic area in which it was actually used, as a source identifier for the goods/services for which it was actually used, from the date of first use) and harder to prove.
FreeState
(10,702 posts)And used a big X as well:
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:OS_X_El_Capitan_logo.svg
(Theirs was assigned for operating systems).
captain queeg
(11,780 posts)Also just saw the the Twitter name was being taken off the building (HQ building?) but of course Muskie didnt get a permit for the equipment blocking traffic on the street so the SFPD shut it down.
LetMyPeopleVote
(179,822 posts)progressoid
(53,179 posts)Bluethroughu
(7,215 posts)It's fitting and worthless.
James48
(5,213 posts)Anything over, oh, say, $44 billion might be an acceptable offer.
(Musk is dumber than I thought.)
Sneederbunk
(17,488 posts)3Hotdogs
(15,362 posts)3H
blogslug
(39,167 posts)I think the Meta "X" y'all are talking about applies to a platform that provides multi-player gaming, and VOIP/text chat.
So, maybe the meta "X" is not the same as elmo's "X"?