Facebook accidentally tries to kill Lamebook

By on November 23, 2010, 8:36 AM
Facebook is currently in a trademark dispute with Lamebook, a site dedicated to poking fun at the status updates, photos, and comments users post on the social networking site. It appears that Facebook bullied Lamebook recently, however, though the Palo Alto company now says that was a mistake, according to NBC.

Facebook recently shutdown Lamebook's Facebook Page and the Like buttons on Lamebook.com. "Well, Facebook didn't like us sticking up for ourselves, so they shut down our Fan Page, are preventing any users from 'liking' us, and won't even let you share URLs with your friends if they point to Lamebook," reads a message on the joke site. "In light of this, be sure to follow us on Twitter so you get updated with the latest and funniest of the lame!"

All this functionality has been restored, apparently, after Facebook realized it messed up. "This was a mistake on our part," Bret Taylor, Facebook's CTO, said in a statement. "In the process of dealing with a routine trademark violation issue regarding some links posted to Facebook, we blocked all mentions of the phrase "lamebook" on Facebook. We are committed to promoting free expression on Facebook. We apologize for our mistake in this case, and we are working to fix the process that led to this happening."

If Facebook had done this on purpose, it would have been a huge abuse of the website's power (Lamebook likely gets a fair share of traffic, and thus money from advertising, thanks to Facebook). It's therefore slightly reassuring that the company fixed the issue on its own accord.

After Facebook threatened to take the parody site to court, Lamebook filed a lawsuit earlier this month, asking the court to rule that it did not infringe upon Facebook trademarks and that it is protected by the US First Amendment. Last week, Facebook filed a trademark-infringement lawsuit against Lamebook in federal court, arguing that Lamebook is not a legally protected parody because it does not "provide any critique or comment of Facebook itself." In the meantime, Lamebook is asking its users for donations to its legal fund.





User Comments: 34

Got something to say? Post a comment
Staff
Jesse Jesse said:

Facebook is an evil giant. Yea right they did it accidentally. They just realized they were going to get into some shit for it, so they backpedaled as fast as they could.

lchu12 lchu12 said:

prismatics said:

Facebook is an evil giant. Yea right they did it accidentally. They just realized they were going to get into some shit for it, so they backpedaled as fast as they could.

Agreed.

posermobile89 said:

lchu12 said:

prismatics said:

Facebook is an evil giant. Yea right they did it accidentally. They just realized they were going to get into some shit for it, so they backpedaled as fast as they could.

Agreed.

double agreed

Burty117 Burty117, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

prismatics said:

Facebook is an evil giant. Yea right they did it accidentally. They just realized they were going to get into some shit for it, so they backpedaled as fast as they could.

Triple Agreed!

Guest said:

Also helicopters

Wagan8r Wagan8r said:

Yet another example of Zuckerberg's "I've every mistake you could think of". Too bad he doesn't learn and continues to make them.

matrix86 matrix86 said:

"Facebook accidentally tries to kill Lamebook"

I hate to be the grammar Natzi here, but you can't "accidentally try" to do something, lol. You either accidentally do something, or you try to do something...trying means their is a purpose behind your actions. HIEL GRAMMAR!

bakape said:

matrix86 said:

"Facebook accidentally tries to kill Lamebook"

I hate to be the grammar Natzi here, but you can't "accidentally try" to do something, lol. You either accidentally do something, or you try to do something...trying means their is a purpose behind your actions. HIEL GRAMMAR!

Thus the ironic oxymoron.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

"Facebook accidentally tries to kill Lamebook"

I hate to be the grammar Natzi here, but you can't "accidentally try" to do something, lol. You either accidentally do something, or you try to do something...trying means their is a purpose behind your actions. HIEL GRAMMAR!

I think that a rephrase might satisfy the Grammar Fuhrer's lust for power.

"Facebook" could have been merely trying to wound, "Lamebook", and accidentally killed it in the process.

Since all of this is hypothetical, the tenses of those verbs were giving me quite a tussle. Accordingly, feel free to comment on that, but be forewarned, I simply don't care.

Guest said:

Shouldn't it be "tried" to kill, and not "tries" to kill? Past tense and all.

princeton princeton said:

matrix86 said:

"Facebook accidentally tries to kill Lamebook"

I hate to be the grammar Natzi here, but you can't "accidentally try" to do something, lol. You either accidentally do something, or you try to do something...trying means their is a purpose behind your actions. HIEL GRAMMAR!

It's Emil. Did you expect perfect grammar and spelling?

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

"Facebook" could have been merely trying to wound, "Lamebook", and accidentally killed it in the process.

Since all of this is hypothetical, the tenses of those verbs were giving me quite a tussle. Accordingly, feel free to comment on that, but be forewarned, I simply don't care.

Shouldn't it be "tried" to kill, and not "tries" to kill? Past tense and all.
OK, I was jus' funnin' witcha about the verb's tenses.

The first phrase of the sentence is in the past conditional or subjunctive mood, and the concluding phrase is the the past tense.

jonelsorel said:

That Zuckenberg of a master just admitted recently in an interview that they made all the mistakes they could with the company.. I guess the list can go on, huh? Stupid owner, stupid site, fake friends and all. Socializing my ass. Real socializing happens OUTSIDE the house. But that's something Zucky hasn't learned yet it seems.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

That Zuckenberg of a master just admitted recently in an interview that they made all the mistakes they could with the company.. I guess the list can go on, huh? Stupid owner, stupid site, fake friends and all. Socializing my ***. Real socializing happens OUTSIDE the house. But that's something Zucky hasn't learned yet it seems.
The real tragedy, is that 500,000,000 million subscribers haven't learned that either.

jonelsorel said:

captaincranky said:

The real tragedy, is that 500,000,000 million subscribers haven't learned that either.

A majority of whom are citizens of developed nations, I suspect. No biggie though. Without being a partisan of any social system in particular ("power corrupts" , capitalism is screwed from inception anyway, and will crumble eventually.

maestromasada said:

What is facebook anyway? a massive ball of junk, full of dismembered people rolling over the land, squashing over more people and dragging them in, careful! here the come! take cover!

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

A majority of whom are citizens of developed nations, I suspect. No biggie though. Without being a partisan of any social system in particular ("power corrupts" , capitalism is screwed from inception anyway, and will crumble eventually.
Honor to labor, comrade! Or whatever God or establishment you kneel to.

vlad4861 said:

it looks like i'm the only fan of facebook here...it's like watching hockey game where everyone is cheering for the same team

jonelsorel said:

Cool! What is it like being a fan of fake human interactions ?

jonelsorel said:

captaincranky said:

Honor to labor, comrade! Or whatever God or establishment you kneel to.

I can consider myself lucky for having lived in both socialism and capitalism. The point is I condone neither, both have advantages, both have drawbacks. But when it comes to civil liberties, capitalism makes the other one look like a joke.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

Cool! What is it like being a fan of fake human interactions ?
I thought all human interaction was faked, starting with the "orgasm" at the moment of our conception.

I can consider myself lucky for having lived in both socialism and capitalism. The point is I condone neither, both have advantages, both have drawbacks. But when it comes to civil liberties, capitalism makes the other one look like a joke.
I doubt that you have lived under socialism. Most, if not all governments, purporting to be "socialist", were actually communist states. Hippie Communes were probably closer to true socialism, than the totalitarian regimes passing themselves off as "socialist".

Nima304 said:

prismatics said:

Facebook is an evil giant. Yea right they did it accidentally. They just realized they were going to get into some shit for it, so they backpedaled as fast as they could.

I agree entirely. I hope Lamebook wins the lawsuit.

vlad4861 said:

pretty damn goood!!

i haven't met nearly in as many people in person as before i joined. but i do understand that many socializing online only.

Benny26 Benny26, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Dropped a bit of a big bollock here has facebook...But hey, what's new eh?

jonelsorel said:

captaincranky said:

Cool! What is it like being a fan of fake human interactions ?
I thought all human interaction was faked, starting with the "orgasm" at the moment of our conception.

I can consider myself lucky for having lived in both socialism and capitalism. The point is I condone neither, both have advantages, both have drawbacks. But when it comes to civil liberties, capitalism makes the other one look like a joke.
I doubt that you have lived under socialism. Most, if not all governments, purporting to be "socialist", were actually communist states. Hippie Communes were probably closer to true socialism, than the totalitarian regimes passing themselves off as "socialist".

Well, that's like saying that if you live in the US today, you're in a fascist state. Not that it's untrue, considering the nature of its goverment and the amount of civil liberties violated in the last 10 years only. Canada, compared to the US, has a far better social system in place (health and education, just to name a couple). Does that make them communists? A totalitarian regime isn't mandatorily socialist, just as a socialist regime isn't necessarily totalitarian.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

The Soviet Union, passed itself off as a "socialist" state for decades. There are incalculable numbers of "civil rights violations" committed by the Soviet government, both in Russia proper, and in the satellite states. If you think your "civil rights" are being violated under capitalism, I think you're a crybaby. Your pocketbook is being violated, by social programs. When Social Security was introduced, it was considered "too socialist". So then, in a round about way, socialist policies could be violating your civil rights via taxation. You (our) representatives piss your (our) money away haphazard way. Money powers the capitalist state, and the more you have the more power you have collaterally.

You can spin the truth any way you like, but the fact of the matter is, this discussion doesn't have a place in this thread.

The badly off topic divergence began here;

I can consider myself lucky for having lived in both socialism and capitalism. The point is I condone neither, both have advantages, both have drawbacks. But when it comes to civil liberties, capitalism makes the other one look like a joke.
Government and Facebook / Lamebook, have nothing to do with one another, other than obviating the herd like actions of a rather stupid, easily led species. Well, also the fact that we're all smarmy, a** kissing politicians at heart, a truth that seems to be particularly prevalent at Facebook. What I always say about Facebook is this, "go for the fake friends, stay for the malware".

The fact of that matter is, your post doesn't even make your viewpoint clear, as it lacks a frame of reference.

So, nobody wins in a political discussion, every body carries the same beliefs forward into the next political discussion, which pretty much renders anybody's point rather moot.

jonelsorel said:

Excuse me? Tapping phones and internet conversations with no warrant in order to protect the homeland against "terrorists" ? That's exactly what happened during the soviet era in the USSR and ex-satellite states, my friend. Only thing is the cold war ended 20 years ago, but things only worsened in this respect in the west. Why? Because there's always an "enemy" SOMEWHERE in the world that wants you dead, right? Thing is there is ALWAYS an "enemy" that justifies your country's government to impose changes, whether social or economic. With the risk of repeating myself, my point is that none of the conveniently antagonistic systems are better than the other. Every now and then throughout history there were major changes in systems and beliefs. And my belief is that we're approaching one of those moments pretty soon.

PS: no, I don't live in Russia or its ex-satellites. And even if i did, that shouldn't make me your "enemy" in any way.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

Excuse me? Tapping phones and internet conversations with no warrant in order to protect the homeland against "terrorists" ? That's exactly what happened during the soviet era in the USSR and ex-satellite states, my friend. Only thing is the cold war ended 20 years ago, but things only worsened in this respect in the west. Why? Because there's always an "enemy" SOMEWHERE in the world that wants you dead, right? Thing is there is ALWAYS an "enemy" that justifies your country's government to impose changes, whether social or economic. With the risk of repeating myself, my point is that none of the conveniently antagonistic systems are better than the other. Every now and then throughout history there were major changes in systems and beliefs. And my belief is that we're approaching one of those moments pretty soon. .
OK first, everybody knows that Cheney and his pet boob George Bush, together with the "Patriot Act", trampled all over everybody's civil rights inabundant and blatant fashion.

Second , a true socialist government would be preferable to either a "democratic" or "communist" regime. The trouble with purist socialism, it that just it's somebody else ranting about their concept of Utopia. Karl Marx repeats himself constantly. Of the 125 pages of the "Communist Manifesto" there's only about 10 pages of original material, the rest is Marx's infatuation with the sound of his own voice.

The US isn't a Democracy, it's a "Meritocracy", based on the virtue of how much money you have, or can command.

PS: no, I don't live in Russia or its ex-satellites. And even if i did, that shouldn't make me your "enemy" in any way.
See, statements like this are the reason I'm asking you to either refrain from posting, or come back to the topic. Where is it exactly that I've given you the impression that I'm "hating on you", as the children say. I haven't. I have developed an impression of you, which is that of a paranoic revolutionary lunatic, who feels compelled to bring his politics to bear on the most trivial of subjects.

If any of the foregoing doesn't suit your sense and sensibilities there's this; listen, I've read 1984 also, and it sounds like you've pulled most of your material direct from Orwell.

I love the remnants of the Soviet Union. The Caucasus mountains run through Georgia, and they surrounding territories seem to be inhabited by some of the most beautiful women in the world. With that said, I'm going to concentrate on the things that I do want to change, such as Russian women, and direct my thoughts away from things I can't change, such as the new world order.

And finally there's this, from a forty year old song by the Who titled, "Won't Get Fooled Again", "meet the new boss, same as the old boss", (Peter Townshend).

miska_man said:

The interwebz. The only place where a discussion about Facebook can lead to politics.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

The interwebz. The only place where a discussion about Facebook can lead to politics.

Facebook is actually a topic that lends itself to moving towards a poltical discussion very, very, well. Facebook is mostly about smarmy brown nosers cultivating the most superficial friendships, by lying about themselves and who they think they are, to gain popularity and recognition.. That said, there's 500,000,000 petty individuals aggressively indulging in self promotion at Facebook. In short, there's an equal number of political campaigns going on simultaneously.

Again, like I always say, "Facebook, come for the trivial relationships, stay for the malware".

Or sometimes I say this, "What happens in Facebook, stays in your credit report".

jonelsorel said:

@ captaincrancky: my last statement was mildly sarcastic. Sorry for not making it more obvious to you.

Unfortunately, bad guess. I haven't read one iota of Orwell up to now. And I don't just pull material from others' ideas, like you do with Marx, "meritocracy", etc.. I can critically think for myself, and again - especially through the experience of having lived under both systems for long enough. This is something you obviously haven't, and can only theoreticize about.

I post wherever and whatever I want to, even if that doesn't exactly make your senses tingle with excitement. You can probably apply your urge to shush others somewhere closer to your home, where it's nobody's business what you do.

As for your summary description of how you perceive me, that's the beauty of the web. Where lines are easy to read, but harder to read inbetween. And since you've obvious reading habits, see the DSM IV before you try to diagnose psychological disorders.

And finally: yes, women from these parts have pretty much the best genes I've seen so far.

No way you can get cranky here..

jonelsorel said:

captaincranky said:

[...] a paranoic revolutionary lunatic, who feels compelled to bring his politics to bear on the most trivial of subjects.

one post later:

captaincranky said:

Facebook is actually a topic that lends itself to moving towards a poltical discussion very, very, well.

LOL

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

A majority of whom are citizens of developed nations, I suspect. No biggie though. Without being a partisan of any social system in particular ("power corrupts" , capitalism is screwed from inception anyway, and will crumble eventually.
OK, here I'm getting visions of Nikita Kruschev pounding on the desk at the UN, claiming, "we will bury you".

That said, I think I had you pegged on the first try.....

Cool! What is it like being a fan of fake human interactions ?
I'm not a fan of this, I thought I'd made that quite clear.

In the spirit of Glasnost, we're 100% in agreement about this.

@ captaincrancky: my last statement was mildly sarcastic. Sorry for not making it more obvious to you.

Unfortunately, bad guess. I haven't read one iota of Orwell up to now. And I don't just pull material from others' ideas, like you do with Marx, "meritocracy", etc.. I can critically think for myself, I post wherever and whatever I want to, even if that doesn't exactly make your senses tingle with excitement. You can probably apply your urge to shush others somewhere closer to your home, where it's nobody's business what you do.

and again - especially through the experience of having lived under both systems for long enough. This is something you obviously haven't, and can only theoreticize about.

Oh no you're special! You're an original! You reinvent the wheel every time you open your mouth.... If you don't mind saying so yourself...... It appears I don't need a formal education in psychology. The more I shush you, the more you want to run your mouth. So, it would seem that "freedom of speech" agrees with you after all. Certainly more than you're letting on.
As for your summary description of how you perceive me, that's the beauty of the web. Where lines are easy to read, but harder to read inbetween. And since you've obvious reading habits, see the DSM IV before you try to diagnose psychological disorders.
Oh, that'd be more trouble than it's worth for this little exchange. I'll jus' rely on good ol' folk wisdom and say, "it takes one to know one".

And finally: yes, women from these parts have pretty much the best genes I've seen so far.
And verily, a second point of agreement. Our capitalist social entitlement programs such as food stamps have run amok.The consequences of this are quite salient, our entire country is starting to look like a f***ing stockyard, and the girls heading out for an evening on the town, do the danged-est impression of a stampede that you're ever likely to see. To bring this back somewhere toward the subject, I hope they've saved their high school photos to put on their Facebook walls, because that was probably the last time the wall would hold them.

No way you can get cranky here..
You say that, but judging from your writings, it's obvious that you don't mean it.

jonelsorel said:

captaincranky said:

...............

bigger LOL

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.