Facebook seeks to copyright the word ‘BOOK’ in new user agreement as company tightens grasp around other common words like ‘wall’ and ‘face’
By Beth Stebner
PUBLISHED: 19:33, 25 March 2012 | UPDATED: 20:12, 25 March 2012
Facebook is again trying to assert itself as an unsurpassed brand by seeking to trademark the word ‘book.’
The social media behemoth secretly slipped in the small clause in its newest user agreement page, meaning that all Facebook users who log onto the site are agreeing to the terms.
While the assertion doesn’t make the trademark legally binding, the clause gives Facebook more protection and clout in future legal standings to protect its intellectual property.
As Wired reported, the change is tucked into Facebook’s Site Governance section.
It reads: ‘You will not use our copyrights or trademarks (including Facebook, the Facebook, and F Logos, FB, Face, Poke, Book, and Wall), or any confusingly similar marks, except as expressly permitted by our Brand Usage Guidelines or with our prior written consent.’
The free social networking site has at least 70 trademarks already, including ‘F,’ ‘F8,’ ‘Wall,’ ‘Friendfeed,’ and ‘Facebook Ads.’
The current statement reads: ‘You will note use our copyrights or trademarks (including Facebook, the Facebook and F Logos, FB, Face, Poke, Wall and 32665), or any confusingly similar marks, without our written permission.
Wired said that while the agreement isn’t as binding as a registered trade mark, because every Facebook user ultimately agrees to the new terms, the net Facebook casts is a wide one.
As of December of last year, Facebook had 845million monthly active users.
According to the Los Angeles Times, Facebook successfully trademarked the word ‘Face.’ Getting such a ubiquitous words as ‘book’ may be more of a challenge.
Wired notes that a company called myEworkBook filed a patent application recently, but it was denied by the trademark review board.
In August 2010, Facebook filed a lawsuit against Teachbook, insofar as to say that the use of the word in the company’s name diluted ‘the distinctiveness of the Facebook Marks, imparting their ability to function as unique and distinctive identifiers of Facebook’s goods and services.’
A representative for Facebook declined to comment to MailOnline.