Hacker News Reader

Comment by dylan604 | Hacker News Reader

You meant the company that doesn't have a website other than to complain someone is using their name? I don't buy into the meta.company claims at all with the "evidence" provided. I laughed at this this when it first appeared, and continue laughing at it now

View on HN

Yes I chose my use of "apparently" and "if this is true" carefully. There is another widely reported instance, better known as Meta PC, filing before Facebook for the mark "Meta", covering "Computers, laptops and portable computers, tablets, computer peripherals, servers, networking equipment, software, computer components, namely, ram, disk drives, namely, hard and optical disk drives, and all related accessories, namely, keyboards, mice, wireless keyboards and mice, speakers, external hard drive backup devices, wireless air cards, wireless routers, monitors, chairs". This is indeed live on the USPTO search right now. That to me sounds like a potential problem.

Not if you have Zuck's Fuck You money financing the cause. Your potential problem just became billable hours for the Army of the Damned-Lawyers.

What? You don't have any more money to keep playing? Please insert $0.25 to continue. No? So sorry, so long, what was yours is now mine, thus it ever was. </ifOnlyThisWereSarcasm>

I did too. There is no way Facebook didn't have the name 100% secured before announcing. This is just another example of journalists not doing their due diligence and Twitter being dumb.

I don't know anything about journalists or Twitter in this case specifically, but I agree flat out Twitter is dumb.

I only know of the meta.company claim from a post made here on HN. I'm guessing it was somebody realizing that FB didn't claim all of the TLDs and trolled them about it. So I laugh at it because of that being a possibility as much as if it is a serious anything I laugh at how laughable their attempt at whatever they are attempting is.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com