Arizona PC builder that applied for Meta trademark says Facebook can buy the name for...

midian182

Posts: 7,782   +80
Staff member
In brief: Facebook changing its corporate name to Meta could cost the company more than expected. An Arizona firm called Meta PCs that sells laptops, accessories, and customized rigs already applied to trademark the "Meta" name in August but is willing to sell it to Zuckerberg and co. for $20 million.

Last week saw Facebook confirm rumors that it is changing its name. While the social media platform retains the Facebook brand, the company itself is now called Meta, named after the idea of a VR/AR metaverse that Zuckerberg has been talking about for a while.

But Meta/Facebook could face problems beyond the name change failing to distract people from its slew of recent bad press. According to a document shared by TMZ, Arizona firm Meta PCs filed a trademark for the Meta name in August, just over a year after it started trading.

Meta PCs co-founder Zack Shutt told The Guardian that the company was registered in November last year, and none of the team was aware of Facebook's plans to rebrand as Meta until last week. Both Shutt and co-founder Joe Darger say they won't sell the name for anything less than $20 million.

A TMZ source said that Facebook believes they have the necessary rights to acquire the name, and it's noted that Meta PCs' trademark petition hasn't yet been granted. There are also plenty of legal loopholes a multi-billion company such as Facebook could exploit if needed, such as filing an application in another country and using that application date to file in the US.

In a mocking tweet, Shutt posted a video similar to the one Zuckerberg made in which the billionaire announced the name change. In Shutt's clip, he states that Meta PCs is "now Facebook."

Permalink to story.

 

Phaetos

Posts: 99   +76
I used to listen to his podcast every week, Dopetek Podcast. I didn't realize that he was the one that started Meta PC's. He's also one of the guys that started Player One Coffee. $20mil will do ALOT to grow the business, no need to get extremely greedy and force Zuck's hand to do something legally underhanded to get what he wants, just price it for a decent amount, get paid and everyone be happy.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 7,487   +6,290
You guys are having a laugh. Facebook aren't going to pay a penny. They've gone in at $20m in the hope it will be slightly cheaper to pay them than to file the lawsuit. Any more and Facebook would just outspend them in court.
The Goliath companies do not always win their trademark cases just because they are Goliaths. McDonald's, for instance, has lost cases for trademark infringement. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mahmoo...lds-global-trademark-battles/?sh=652973cb1f41
If the company is a David, IMO, it is worth fighting the Goliaths of the world because letting the Goliaths win is just bowing down to those who pretend that they are the only companies that matter, and, IMO, every small company loses something by letting the Goliaths win without a fight.
 

nodfor

Posts: 209   +369
Meta PCs is different from META (an extra acronym is added)

Good chance of the lawsuit getting dismissed immediately.
 

Fox God Records

Posts: 98   +88
Meta PCs is different from META (an extra acronym is added)

Good chance of the lawsuit getting dismissed immediately.
That's the company name, yes. But the image from TMZ says that the ™ is for META alone, without the PCs. And seeing that the application relates to both hardware and software. . . Facebook should take the buyout. If they try to sue, META PCs can ask for more cash AND legal fees.

So:
1) Pay the ransom
2) Sweep the whole issue under the rug
3) . . .
4) PROFIT!
 

zulu53

Posts: 109   +37
I used to listen to his podcast every week, Dopetek Podcast. I didn't realize that he was the one that started Meta PC's. He's also one of the guys that started Player One Coffee. $20mil will do ALOT to grow the business, no need to get extremely greedy and force Zuck's hand to do something legally underhanded to get what he wants, just price it for a decent amount, get paid and everyone be happy.
Zuck has a mental condition (clinically called a "God Complex"). This condition will not allow him to pay someone else for the uniqueness of "his" company name. He would rather spend millions on lawyers than look like he shouldn't be gifted the name. He could have reseaching the name rights and just buoght them before the official name change, as he could have done it for a few million. But God expects "gifts" from his people.
 

GeforcerFX

Posts: 1,029   +493
Since the company doesn't own the trademark yet they prob have an uphill battle, I doubt facebook will pay them $20 million for a name that's essentially in legal limbo. I could also see facebook arguing that meta is a common word/phrase and can't be trademarked.
 

zulu53

Posts: 109   +37
Since the company doesn't own the trademark yet they prob have an uphill battle, I doubt facebook will pay them $20 million for a name that's essentially in legal limbo. I could also see facebook arguing that meta is a common word/phrase and can't be trademarked.
It is not really in legal limbo at all. Premeditation in this case is a valid argument for the application to be approved PRIOR to any other claims being allowed. As the article pointed out, the Arizona firm made it clear that they has initiated their claim to the name way, way prior to any indication that FB would want the name. Based on this they have first claim not FB. While the "wheels are in motion" of the trademark process are still going round and round this claim still stands supreme. Of course the Trademark office could still deny their claim and award it to FB: but I am sure there would be many claims of corruption (money moving from FB to TM Officers) made against them if they did this without iron-clad justification.
 

kiwigraeme

Posts: 985   +739
Good BBQ country Arizona - Zuck should supply him with a lifetime supply of META BBQ sauce .

Don't these court cases depend on intentions. Ie if only down to make FB pay -then court can give verdict to FB
But if it's a real business then FB needs to pay.

with urls- and payment slips - court normally favours incumbent - not sure if relevant here .

Maybe FB has to show a chain of info from FB to this guy
 

Ludak021

Posts: 678   +504
Zuck has a mental condition (clinically called a "God Complex"). This condition will not allow him to pay someone else for the uniqueness of "his" company name. He would rather spend millions on lawyers than look like he shouldn't be gifted the name. He could have reseaching the name rights and just buoght them before the official name change, as he could have done it for a few million. But God expects "gifts" from his people.

of course, because spending millions on lawyers is tax deductible. Cook it a little bit and state will end up paying you instead.
 

Steveb8189

Posts: 72   +77
The Goliath companies do not always win their trademark cases just because they are Goliaths. McDonald's, for instance, has lost cases for trademark infringement. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mahmoo...lds-global-trademark-battles/?sh=652973cb1f41
If the company is a David, IMO, it is worth fighting the Goliaths of the world because letting the Goliaths win is just bowing down to those who pretend that they are the only companies that matter, and, IMO, every small company loses something by letting the Goliaths win without a fight.

That example is the other way round. McDonalds were trying to stop the Irish company using the name. In that case nobody won/lost. Both companies can continue to use the name and no money went either way. Am I missing something?