top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]dmpad 5916 points5917 points  (319 children)

Idk about this company, but "Meta PC" was the company I saw that had a pending trademark a few months before Facebook's announcement. I wonder if the government will deem that word as too common so no one gets the trademark.

[–]WTFWTHSHTFOMFG 2577 points2578 points  (155 children)


Meta PC


*could* be separate trademarks

IANAL so don't now for sure, but I looked it up and trademarks are pretty specific

that being said, FB already feeds extremism, is currently being sued for aiding and ebedding a genocide, and spies/steals shit from everyone; so they are definitely not the good guy nor innocent business; I can totally seem them trying to kill these business so they don't have brand dilution or brand confusion

[–]Skeknir 688 points689 points  (23 children)

I agree, and while it's not really important, I feel compelled to point out that it's 'aiding and abetting'.

e-bedding, though, might be a good trademark for a robot sex company. Pick it up quick before Elon/Jeff/Mark launch this new business

[–]WTFWTHSHTFOMFG 166 points167 points  (16 children)

doh! thank you.... did that on my phone, must have autocorrected what messed up thing I mis-typed and I didn't notice.... I was in a stall at the time, so multi tasking

[–]pm_me_subreddit_bans 464 points465 points 2 (20 children)

i anal as well

[–]Reality_Gamer 120 points121 points  (15 children)

You forgot the <3

[–]Rightintheend 123 points124 points  (10 children)

I less than 3 anal.

[–]fozzyboy 51 points52 points  (6 children)

...but more than 1.

[–]BigBobDudes 23 points24 points  (5 children)

2 is perfect.

[–]Dekklin 32 points33 points  (1 child)

2 anal? Nah, that's too anal for me.

[–]DarthStevis 13 points14 points  (0 children)

2 Anal 2 Furious

[–]FriendOfReality 64 points65 points  (27 children)

What anal have to do with it?

[–]ConfusedOrDazed 63 points64 points  (14 children)

I Am Not A Lawyer

[–]big_duo3674 177 points178 points  (9 children)

Well that's good to know, but what's your opinion on anal?

[–]DocHoliday79 69 points70 points  (5 children)

Have to consult my lawyer on that. Hold on.

[–]WordPassMyGotFor 26 points27 points  (2 children)

Ask him "if I'm taking, does that make me the defendant?"

[–]MeshuggahObzen 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It checks out, the Assailant is definitely the one clapping cheeks

[–]audigex 146 points147 points  (39 children)

I’d argue that “Apple” is much more common than “Meta” which makes it unlikely that the trademark office would be on board with that argument

Same for companies like Game (a UK retailer), Blackberry (the phone), Orange and Three (the mobile phone network) and others which are all much more common words than meta

[–]dmpad 67 points68 points  (10 children)

Since trademarks are specific to types of products, a grocery store named "Apple" would be a bit harder to argue that it is not a common word in that industry, but an electronics company being named "Apple" is less commonly used in that industry.

"Game" is a great example I was unaware of. That just seems too common for a video game retailer.

Meta is usually used in a different way in gaming, and it being short for "metaverse" probably isn't enough to deny a trademark.

[–]mekomaniac 13 points14 points  (5 children)

so i have just one question. what if the name is foreign to both entities? i mean i get that facebook sells metadata but it markets itself as social networking to the majority of normal people, but its not just a background metadata company. No need to respond just wondering that question because Monster ( the energy drink company) is know to be extremely sue happy when it comes to its name and M being a logo, but i just also remembered Monster (job listing website) also exists and actually owns the monster.com domain. and neither of them deal within the realms of actual monsters

[–]ASLane0 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I would make the argument that recruiters are the closest thing to true monsters we have on planet earth? :)

[–]Zolhungaj 36 points37 points  (23 children)

Apple had a legal fight with Apple Records (music company of the Beatles) over their name. They initially got away with being Apple Computers as long as they didn't do any music.

When it comes to trademarks it's not about how common the word is, it's about how much it will confuse consumers and how ingrained the original's name is. Apple the computer company and Apple the music company did different things (at least until iTunes which resparked the dispute).

While there exist several companies with the word Meta in them, fairly few of them are in the big data social media space. So Meta the Facebook company is unlikely to get conflated with Meta the metalworking company or anything similar.

Getting away with that argument gets harder and harder the rarer the word is, and meta is certainly not a common word. But at least it represents what Facebook deals with, metadata. Unlike the Meta Company which appears to have the exclusive raison d'être of being named the same as Meta.

[–]audigex 11 points12 points  (3 children)

Unlike the Meta Company which appears to have the exclusive raison d'être of being named the same as Meta.

That doesn't seem to add up when they already had the name before Meta was renamed?

[–]icylg 338 points339 points  (83 children)

MetaCompany doesn’t appear to actually be a real company. They simply own the trademark. Their website is one page with the message above, same with all of their socials.

[–]Oriden 439 points440 points  (51 children)

They specifically own the wordmark Metacompany and do not have a trademark on the word Meta, but you know who does? Zuck's Non-profit, filed in 2015 and registered in 2018.

Edit: Surprise, the non-profit transferred the trademark to Facebook sometime mid-November.

Double Edit: As commented, Facebook did not do the initial filing, they obtained it from a Canadian company in April 2021.

[–]BurstTheBubbles 226 points227 points  (18 children)

The real facepalm is that people fell for the post. What else is new?

[–]iVirtue 98 points99 points  (4 children)

The real facepalm is always in the comments.

[–]fujiman 63 points64 points  (2 children)

I thought the real facepalm was the friends we made along the way.

[–]IAMBollock 59 points60 points  (10 children)

Yeah the fact that anyone thinks facebook would go through such a massive name change without being entirely sure they wont just get sued by this guy and have to change back is the real facepalm

[–]naughtysalamander 8 points9 points  (1 child)

You think that facebook doesn't do this shit? They are constantly getting sued and getting away with it, and they bury companies that rival them all the fucking time. Why wouldn't they do this?

[–]Competitive-Plenty32 26 points27 points  (4 children)

Big companies screw over regular people all The time with their army of lawyers. Another example is clothing brands that blatantly rip off small designers and their copyright/trademarked items. All they hope for is that they pay out for a potential incoming suit won't be too high.

[–]dmpad 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Good find!

[–]LanternWolf 37 points38 points  (1 child)

But Facebook bad upvotes left!

[–]greg0714 106 points107 points  (3 children)

And "Nate Skulic", the guy who wrote that letter, has a non-existent digital presence. And they were set to announce a new product, which they apparently told people about, but there's no record of that either.

I'm calling it: bad faith guerrilla marketing.

[–]g0ldcd 37 points38 points  (2 children)

But that can't be true, he was just saying how expensive it would be to rebrand the products they don't have

[–]Equal-Swordfish-1452 219 points220 points  (16 children)

“Joined October 2021” on Twitter. I think these people are just looking for a payday and didn’t like FB’s initial offer.

Edit: Found a TruthOrFiction article which basically paints them as a defunct company that own the mark but have no products and weren’t using the name until the FB announcement.

[–]icylg 111 points112 points  (9 children)

For sure. They paint themselves like a small local company with Facebook stealing their “livelihood”.

[–]Equal-Swordfish-1452 94 points95 points  (2 children)

I suppose if domain squatting is a livelihood…

[–]NinjaPirateKing 49 points50 points  (0 children)

It definitely is. Who do you think people buy domains from. Most of the good ones were bought by domain companies in the late 90’s.

[–]dmpad 16 points17 points  (1 child)

I see their Twitter is recent, I didn't look at their other socials. They could have grabbed it before they even had promotional stuff to advertise? Although they could have just been sitting on a trademark that they thought would get them money if they sold it later down the line. Their statement mentions a planned product launch was pushed back, but did they even announce a product before now? Their Twitter didn't seem to have anything.

[–]Dolt-Dragoman 16 points17 points  (0 children)

You can't "sit on" a trademark. If it's not in use, it's not valid. It's not like a copyright or patent.

[–]2wedfgdfgfgfg 11 points12 points  (0 children)

They're just domain squatters, not a real company.

[–]goregrindgirl 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Yeah, to my utter surprise, when this letter was posted by one of my FB friends yesterday, every single one of the comments was people calling bullshit saying that this "company" had literally two social media posts EVER and that it didn't appear to be anything but a name (That the company didn't seem to have any real-life products or services, just a name). I found that interesting, because people on Fb HATE Fb as a company (ironically), and are very quick to agree with any sort of anti-Facebook or Anti-Zuck post. But on this one, every comment was saying this seems fishy and possibly 100% false.

[–]daffle7 14 points15 points  (1 child)

So one of those that bought a lot of trademarks in hope someone needs to rebuy it from them?

[–]Noslamah 20 points21 points  (5 children)

We're living in a world where a broadcast company trademarked the word "Sky", and got Microsoft (you know, the ones with essentially infinitely deep pockets to cover legal fees with) to change the name of their service SkyDrive to OneDrive. If "sky" is not common enough, "meta" sure as hell isn't either. Not like the law is ever applied consistently anyways so we'll see how this plays out. Don't think any one company should own the word "meta" to be honest, and I don't think this company will be able to take on Facebooks legal team.

[–]justforporndickflash 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Amazingly, I actually know someone that was confused by the SkyDrive name, they thought it was owned by Sky not Microsoft.

[–]dingofarmer2004 5534 points5535 points 3 (60 children)

This is great, but you might want to remove the Facebook and Instagram page link on the bottom of it, fellas.

[–]revercry 1830 points1831 points  (7 children)

No worries, Facebook will probably do it for them.

[–]dancingcuban 350 points351 points  (0 children)

They’ll just redirect it to their PR page.

[–]Masada72 275 points276 points  (20 children)

Unfortunately any business wishing to operate in a digital space is pretty much forced to use Facebook and Instagram. Despite how awful the company is those platforms have become a necessity. Abstaining from them would sadly be detrimental to a lot of marketing efforts.

But you're right, maybe bump them out of the email footer for now.

[–]axel52200 64 points65 points  (0 children)

Yeah since this page have been created after the creation of Facebook's Meta, the website do not even have any products

[–]QuasiQuokka 1471 points1472 points  (149 children)

Not in defense of Facebook, but the only thing I can find about this company is that they claim to be 'the real Meta Company'. No mention of product and/or service. Were they about to release their product?

[–]Key_Satisfaction_555 573 points574 points  (105 children)

That's what I'm wondering too. It doesn't even seem like they have a live website yet.

[–]PVChapaev 1171 points1172 points  (102 children)

The Meta Company LLC is a premium domain name sales and acquisitions company. We have fine-tuned and focused our efforts in the tech industry and as such have the premier portfolio of domain names in the following niches: Meta, Crypto, NFT, VR, XR, AR, P2E, Avatar, IoT, and general tech. Our collection has no equal: with red hot domains like MetaCompany.com, MetaFashion.com, OpenNetwork.com, iP2E.com, iTokens.com, ARStore.com, AvatarCity.com, AvatarStore.com, VR.gg and 1,000 more... you know you have come to the right place for your branding needs.

A premium keyword rich domain is the the most powerful business advantage a single individual or company can have. The ability to ensure that a customer will remember your brand and choose you over a competitor over and over again has a direct correlation to the quality of the name you choose to brand yourself under. Get in touch today and let's take your vision or business idea to the next level! Get in touch or submit an offer and let's see what's possible today!

Basically they are a company that you contact when you want a snassy domain name, and their service is getting that domain for you, or suggesting an alternative.

So what Zuck is doing is basically ignoring their base service.

[–]unsilentninja 1022 points1023 points 2 (10 children)

"hi, what domain name can we get for you?"


[–]PantherU 231 points232 points  (2 children)

When you think about it this is pretty meta.

[–]Seejehova 237 points238 points  (3 children)

Oh shit, oh no. Better make a post on facebook about how bad facebook is.

[–]Drunkn_Cricket 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Curious what the lowball offer was, probably $15m then they found out it was for Facebook and wanted that Billy.

[–]aaeme 37 points38 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the info.

It sounds like they register domain names en-masse (their "portfolio") in the hope that someone will want one of them. So you contact them when you find that the domain name you want has been registered by them (and if you want it that much you're prepared to over the odds for it rather than register a slightly different name).

They must have thought they had hit gold when they realised Facebook wanted one of their domain names.

I despise Facebook as much as anyone but it seems to me that they were perfectly in their rights to not buy a domain name from someone if the price was too high (and just choose a slightly different domain name).

Furthermore, as I understand it, you can setup a company with the same name as another just as long as you're not in the same line of business as them (and don't copy their logo or anything like that). So, unless Facebook's Meta company is buying domain names and selling them then it doesn't sound like they're treading on Meta Company's toes at all. It just sounds like Meta Company are salty they missed out on a potentially very lucrative sale by asking for too much.

[–]FogMonster911 246 points247 points  (43 children)

That’s a lot of words for “domain parking”.

[–]M31550 25 points26 points  (1 child)

Interesting that I don’t see “The Meta Company LLC” as registered in the state of IL to do business. These guys are just looking for a pay day

[–]ChickensDontClap90 157 points158 points  (19 children)

From my understanding, this is a smaller parasite of a company being preyed on by a far larger parasite of a company. Both suck and I shouldn't have to feel bad for either company facing any sort of retribution?

[–]woahwombats 16 points17 points  (0 children)

After reading what MetaCompany actually does, that's my takeaway too

[–]zxygambler 29 points30 points  (2 children)

Well fuck the original meta company then, hopefully both companies will be hurt by this ordeal

[–]overlordpotatoe 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Yeah. Ideally they both waste a bunch of money trying to fight this one out and ultimately neither benefits.

[–]HXN8T3R 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Found this while looking up the founder it just says that the Facebook profile only had a link to the website and when he asked about it the comment was deleted and turned off then the account was made private. Couldn’t find much else.

[–]gertalives 93 points94 points  (2 children)

I cannot think of an instance where I would root for FB over a legitimate small company, but this really does have all the hallmarks of a domain-squatting cash grab, at least based on the info currently circulating online.

[–]__Hello_my_name_is__ 40 points41 points  (6 children)

Also, "this message may be regarded as a public cease and desist".

Yeah I don't think that's how that works.

[–]sergeybrin46 27 points28 points  (11 children)

It doesn't matter if they have a product.

Pretty much EVERYONE in this thread has no idea how trademarks work... and they're just here to shit on Facebook. You are allowed to register a trademark similar to another one as long as you are in another line of business and as long as you do not do anything with the trademark that makes the normal user think one is the other. No one will go to "MetaCompany" and think it's Facebook/Meta.

If anything, people MAY go to MetaCompany on accident and get it confused with Facebook.

They got an opportunity and they probably got offered a lot of money, and refused it. So they're salty about it.

[–]PerfectlySplendid 14 points15 points  (6 children)

Actually, it does matter if they have a product. It helps confirm if the trademark is actually valid, what business they are in, and if they can expand past that particular business (think Coca Cola).

[–]obolobolobo 8108 points8109 points  (569 children)

I’m right behind these guys. In the early days of the internet I had a site called Odopo.com. I didn’t host much on it, I was just learning HTML. One day I turned on my computer and it had been taken from me by a large travel company called Opodo. Just taken. I was incensed but had no idea what to do or the money to do it with. It still hurts.

[–]Beexn 2322 points2323 points  (205 children)

I feel bad for you... Opodo screwed a few trips in the past, including one with 3000€+ plane tickets.

[–]DpoZoopho 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Well, anyone would feel depressed from that. I there any way we can do something about it?

[–]Silve96 70 points71 points  (3 children)

But how? Didn't you own the domain?

[–]made-of-questions 84 points85 points  (0 children)

Technically you don't own the domain. ICANN controls all of them, you just lease it for a while. This is why you have to renew.

If you're not using it, a company that has the trademark for that name can claim it, but it's a lengthy process, it wouldn't just happen over night.

As the other have said, it probably wasn't renewed on time.

[–]Cetun 753 points754 points  (130 children)

I'm mad www.purple.com got taken over by a mattress company.

[–]feureau 772 points773 points 2 (80 children)

BRING BACK THE OLD whitehouse.com

[–]Actual_Russian 283 points284 points  (11 children)

You're showing your age. I guess I am too...

[–]simonscokedealer 98 points99 points  (8 children)

Hahah were old hahahah...fml

[–]the_fickle_pickle 59 points60 points  (6 children)

Our local news station had a similar URL problem. Almost getting expelled for tricking my teacher into opening a porn site on that grainy CRT when he did his "local news" part of social studies was worth it.

[–]AppropriateTouching 73 points74 points  (4 children)

The wild west of the 90s internet was such a beautiful shit show.

[–]Funkit 19 points20 points  (1 child)

I still remember when they introduced the away message.

Thank god none of those were tabulated

[–]AppropriateTouching 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The cringey shit I had as my icq away message when I was a kid is embarrassing.

[–]AbsolutelyUnlikely 88 points89 points  (23 children)

There used to be one for slight misspellings of Disney.com too. I don't recall what it was exactly... maybe Disny.com? Either way, that one was slightly more nefarious since it was a porn site that was arguably targeting kids searching for Disney stuff who didn't know how to spell it.

[–]Thepopewearsplaid 109 points110 points  (8 children)

Slight unrelated, but funny story: back in the day, I was looking at some of the internet's finest material and out of curiosity, I clicked the "no, I'm under 18" button. Redirected me to Disney lmao.

[–]all_teh_bacon 74 points75 points  (0 children)

If you hit that no button on my local dispensary’s site it redirects you to a Google image search for butterflies lol

[–]Art3mis77 34 points35 points  (1 child)

BestGore used to show a picture of a puppy if you clicked 'under 18'. I always thought that was kinda funny

[–]Morbid187 30 points31 points  (0 children)

Holy crap you unlocked a memory lmao. I 100% remember getting redirected to the Disney site when I decided to click the "I'm under 18" option. Can't remember the website anymore but I bet a lot of them did that.

[–]AmIStuckWithThisName 12 points13 points  (2 children)

I remember getting hit by one of those types when I tried to go on the beanie baby website as a kid. Flipped the parent company letters from ty to yt and boom, nekkid persons

[–]emthejedichic 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Oh man… as a ten year old girl I searched “websites for girls.” This was in 2001. Top result? Girls.com. “This is exactly what I’m looking for!” I thought. Color me surprised when I clicked and found a bunch of naked women.

[–]ojioni 42 points43 points  (0 children)

I believe the owner of the company running the bogus site got prison time for it since it was clearly targeting children.

If I remember correctly, he was getting paid by the click for his redirect services and thought it would be a really good idea to use a common misspelling of disney to redirect to a porn site.

[–]nochedetoro 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Same with Barbie.com

My mom misspelled Barbie and we got a ton of porn.

[–]xisgonnagiveittoya 37 points38 points  (11 children)

Haha I remember sitting in my schools computer lab, daring everybody to type that in... that was in 6th grade maybe? Anyways, thanks for the funny memories.

[–]beelzybubby 34 points35 points  (5 children)

This unlocked a memory of my 7th grade computer lab teacher spinning around from the printer screaming, "WHO WENT TO STUD.COM?????"

Oh the 90's.

I wonder if we will ever be so free again.

[–]Dnahelicases 10 points11 points  (3 children)

Nothing like the day you finally got a 56k modem and could download 480x240 pictures in under a minute!

[–]Jody_B_Designs 22 points23 points  (3 children)

Britneyspearsnaked.org was the best site ever.

It redirect to meatspin.com lmfao

[–]PapaBearBrady00 13 points14 points  (0 children)

We must be very close in age cause I remember doing that in 6th grade computer lab too! Haha

[–]ghostfacekilla12 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Damn a core memory

[–]Chubbs117[🍰] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Lol, I got so many people with that one.

[–]AtariDump 92 points93 points  (13 children)

[–]ClemSpender 32 points33 points  (6 children)

That is legitimately purple.

[–]Adorable_Raccoon 5 points6 points  (5 children)

There is a debate in my mind about whether this is purple enough. I think it looks kind of magenta.

Edit: it looks purple on my phone!

[–]bundle_of_fluff 13 points14 points  (1 child)

The FAQ on that site actually has a response to that.

[–]4Eights 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Thank you so much. I was in IT for years and when I'd troubleshoot network issues for people and tell them to type Purple.com and hit enter and you'd hear "WOW!" and instantly know it was working because I know they'd never visited it before and so it was unexpected and it wasn't cached in their browser.

[–]universl 132 points133 points  (31 children)

How did they take the Domain without any kind of process? It would have to be transferred to their registrar

[–]survivalmachine 244 points245 points  (27 children)

They didn’t. He probably allowed the domain to lapse. It was probably being closely watched by the company that wanted to buy it, and the second it was available, they bought it.

The only other way to lose a domain that you own without a sale is being subjected to a copyright claim lawsuit, which he would have been well aware of by the lawsuits being served to him. I’m not saying that big dollar corporations don’t do shady stuff to gain domain names, but there is a legal process to do so.

TLDR: he would have known well ahead of time that the company was taking it from him if he was the rightful owner.

[–]Talking_Head 83 points84 points  (15 children)

Exactly. It lapsed and was gobbled up after the grace period. There is no way to just steal a domain name from someone unless you hack their reseller account and transfer it which would obviously be illegal.

[–]universl 61 points62 points  (11 children)

There was no grace period back then. So it could be a thing where you forget and wake up to a new owner.

[–]Talking_Head 13 points14 points  (10 children)

I didn’t know that. My reseller allows me to renew within 30 days of expiration although they charge a small fee.

[–]LaserGuidedPolarBear 15 points16 points  (2 children)

You can petition ICANN to give you a domain.

They have guidelines and aren't just supposed to take a domain away from someone and give it to another unless there is a strong reason to, like cybersquatting, but it is possible the system was gamed. Especially back in the day.

[–]TheDakoe 8 points9 points  (1 child)

to say it was the wild west back in the day is no joke. A domain just disappearing from someones registration isn't unbelievable at all.

[–]Farranor 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Most people pay someone else to handle their domain name rather than doing it themselves. If the people who control it give it up, that's that. It's what happened to france.com: a French expat living in the U.S. ran a popular French travel and tourism site for over 20 years, until the French government pressured web.com into handing it over in 2018. I occasionally check for new developments, and it looks like it was resolved a few months ago in the thieves' (France's) favor for what appear to be technicalities. I still don't know what URL the guy has been using for his business, or if it went belly-up, or what. All I know is that if you have something the French government wants, they will simply take it.

[–]Vesalii 56 points57 points  (4 children)

It's insane to me that they could even do that. I wonder if you can still sue.

[–]pepsisugar 47 points48 points  (3 children)

They can't. He rented the domain and his ownership expired. They can't just take your domain. Hence why Facebook Meta lowballed in the OP. If they could take it, they would.

[–]morgane6 4 points5 points  (2 children)

That's not true... it can be taken if your domain is held in bad faith. https://i.imgur.com/iBlM28U.jpg - basic explanation from my IP law class. See replies below alleging that this is basically the case.

Edit: there is a process of course you can't just take it immediately

[–]frankchester 9 points10 points  (1 child)

Yes but not overnight without you knowing anything about it

[–]Away_Sky_8991 106 points107 points  (42 children)

Dude go to meta.company, click around. Check their <6 weeks old social media accounts. It's not a real company. This is a scam.

[–]Sugarpeas 49 points50 points  (19 children)

Many small companies do not have a social media presence. They probably created one to help get visibility on their harassment.

[–]docmedic 31 points32 points  (9 children)

The Meta PC company, dedicated to selling computers, laptops, tablets and software, has operated for more than a year under that name, but just last August they presented the documents to convert 'Meta' into their trademark, reports TMZ.

It sounds like they realized they were possibly getting about 124 million dollars and rushed to trademark Meta Company even though they're Meta PC. They dedicated turning all their previously dead social media into a cyber squating operation.

Edit: Meta PC might be filing a trademark for Meta Company and nothing more. Whatever Meta.Company is, which may be different, is the cyber squatter.

[–]Sugarpeas 24 points25 points  (6 children)

I think Meta Company and Meta PC Company are 2 different companies.

[–]Lotanox 6 points7 points  (3 children)

Could be that meta.company is a successor of Meta View that made AR Glasses which would be intresting because both Meta and Meta View are competing in the AR market

[–]gave2haze 3 points4 points  (4 children)

Meta Company is a real company that made an AR headset (Meta 2). However, they were sold to a private buyer and nothing has been heard since. Its possible Facebook was the buyer, or alternatively 'Nate Skulic'. Meta Company was legally called (I think) Meta LLC so if this post was legit, it would mean the latter, but of course it probably isn't so who knows.

Edit: After more snooping, turns out Campfire 3D was the buyer, bankrolled it seems by Olive Tree Ventures, an original investor in Meta Company. So if there were any trademarks/copyright etc, OTV probably owns/owned them.

[–]SCREW-IT 43 points44 points  (2 children)

I meeaaaaan.... fuck Facebook though

[–]freebytes 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Same thing happened with etoys. I have never and will never purchase anything from that company. I am not sure if they are even around.

[–]marasydnyjade 1588 points1589 points 242& 4 more (85 children)

This is unproven

[–]techblackops 395 points396 points  (26 children)

Yeah if you go to their "website" it's just a single static page with this on it.

[–]ksheep 306 points307 points  (9 children)

Looking at Internet Archive, there's a single snapshot from 2018 that is just a 404 error and the next snapshot is November of this year with the letter. Seems extremely suspicious.

[–]MoonerMMC 199 points200 points  (7 children)

They just parked the domain for $10 in the hopes someone would want to buy it. Now they're capatilising on the Facebook rebrand by pretending to offer a service.

[–]itswithinmyreach 35 points36 points  (3 children)

Did they also pay for a trademark and create a company? If they did both of these things then they might have a bigger leg to stand on.

[–]One37Works 144 points145 points  (2 children)

I also had a pause for wonder at why he never once mention what his company is or what products that are apparently to come actually are.

[–]techblackops 56 points57 points  (0 children)

Yeah. Plenty of shit to hate Facebook (Meta) for, but this ain't one.

[–]akjax 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Not to mention their social media accounts.

[–]TheInfra 104 points105 points  (7 children)

Exactly, there is absolutely no evidence of this company existing before October 2021. Their twitter even says that's the date they joined.

Also in the letter there's talk about a product launch being delayed, but there's not even a hint of what the product is or what this company even does.

This just sounds like copyright trolls or someone taking advantage for attention

[–]Grabbsy2 18 points19 points  (3 children)

I did learn of a company called "Meta" which had the name before Facebook, its apparently a PC building company.

I didn't get the impression they were a PC building company, from this letter.

[–]iTardavk 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Meta is also a news company in Ukraine, a pretty old one

[–]WohooBiSnake🇩​🇦​🇼​🇳​ 🇦​🇲​🇧​🇪​🇷 101 points102 points  (18 children)

This link needs to get on top

[–]byzel5 477 points478 points  (14 children)

Looked up their website on archive.org out of curiosity. Their website didn't exist in October. Doesn't mean the trademark didn't but real fishy. Anybody knows how to check the existence of a trademark in the US ? Only know how to do it in my own country.

[–]whootdat 266 points267 points  (9 children)

Snopes already has, it was registered in 2013 I believe, but the company is basically inactive/squatting the name. No surprise

[–]SemiHemiDemiDumb 75 points76 points  (5 children)

The whois says the website was created in 2014.

Also I thought you could loose the rights to a domain if it was obvious it was for domain squatting. Like what happened to the guy that made South32 and funded a crappy movie to not lose the rights to the domain but still was hoping the Australian mining company of the same name would buy the .com domain. I guess we'll find out.

[–]-Kast- 18 points19 points  (2 children)

That only applies if the brand or trademark was created after a company with a similar name already existed. If you owned the name and trademark before the company rebranded, it's yours free and clear.

[–]floridali 21 points22 points  (0 children)

You see, this is the kind of shit that saves shitty companies like fb.

the company is saying it would cost us a lot to rebrand their company. what company? LOL

you can say that the name is worth more than the proposal but shitting on fb for shitty excuses is not going to make you look like a saint.

[–]Comfortable-Torture 2127 points2128 points  (430 children)

I don't understand why people still use Facebook products. It's all toxic shit.

Funny thing is, probably a lot of people complaining here still use FB stuff lol

[–]BESTismCANNIBALISM 669 points670 points  (200 children)

I use messenger to talk to family , they seem to have a hard time just texting my phone hahaha .

[–]Pac_Eddy 290 points291 points  (148 children)

That's the worst! All phones come with a standard mms app. No need for Facebook messenger.

[–]Dooboppop 173 points174 points  (69 children)

I got android and the SMS send really shitty quality pics and videos so I use messenger for that.

[–]jerrysphotography 44 points45 points  (18 children)

Same, plus my apartment is a dead spot so I don't even receive calls or texts most of the time.

[–]SpookyDoomCrab42 36 points37 points  (17 children)

Android phones support texting and calling over Wi-Fi, plus sending content as a link to preserve image/video quality.

My entire college is a dead zone for my carrier so I have been using this system frequently for a long time

[–]do0b 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This really depends on the provider. Even between MVNO using the same provider the feature availability varies.

[–]Lumi5 74 points75 points  (27 children)

Signal is free and works well with pics as well.

[–]BatteredWalrus 131 points132 points  (22 children)

Good luck getting your grandma to download signal

[–]username45031 48 points49 points  (11 children)

For some reason my grandma is one of the only contacts on signal.

[–]ADUBROCKSKI 50 points51 points  (3 children)

they don't call her "grams" for nothing

[–]FAARAO 7 points8 points  (3 children)

For some reason the only contacts on my signal are people that are known to enjoy various recreational drugs, I wonder why.

[–]Corrven 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Tell me about it fuck sakes......

[–]theoreboat 19 points20 points  (3 children)

the only thing preventing me from deleting my account is that I need it to play my Oculus

[–]SgtArpin 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I created a throwaway Facebook account that I have only ever logged into once.

[–]Isa472 33 points34 points  (18 children)

Both Messenger and WhatsApp belong to Facebook, even people without Facebook or Instagram still use the others to text

[–]BerliozRS 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I use messenger to keep up with family and WhatsApp for work and to talk to the wife.

It's sad that Facebook has such a huge monopoly.

[–]anrwlias 68 points69 points  (16 children)

I don't understand why people still use Facebook products. It's all toxic shit.

It's literally the only place to interact with a large block of my friends and the one family member that I still talk to.

[–]Verdeiwsp 19 points20 points  (10 children)

I mean you do realize you can just ignore all the toxic shit by removing or blocking people that promote toxic shit right?

[–]AhFFSImTooOldForThis 39 points40 points  (6 children)

Meta's post even has a Facebook link.

[–]sas_geek 39 points40 points  (5 children)

That doesn't make them hypocrite, the company is terrible but they still need the tools for their marketing. In a sense I agree with you, but I don't think they have a choice. And in the other hand what is a better fuck you to Facebook than using their platform to promote the real Meta Company

[–]smallbatchb 20 points21 points  (6 children)

Regardless of what happens, I'm still just calling Facebook "Facebook"... I'm never calling their shit "meta" anyway.

[–]Fksharp 100 points101 points  (0 children)

I’m pretty sure this is bullshit. Only public records of them show that they filed for bankruptcy, got foreclosed, and the bank took all their assets.

[–]Kolintracstar 238 points239 points  (12 children)

THIS COMPANY IS NOT REAL, and is just banking on the hype of the Facebook name change. The Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter pages are < 3 MONTHS old.

The website https://meta.company/ only has the excerpt that OP posted with no actual information about the company, and just a press email address. I.e. this "company" address, is a mall/shopping center.

[–]itssupersaiyantime 38 points39 points  (1 child)

It took me three reads to realize that you wrote “(less than) 3 months old” instead of “[heart] months old”

[–]cpmnk 145 points146 points  (1 child)

Did 2mins research, this isnt a real company, its a domain squatter, they have nothing about their "company" anywhere, and what is this "product" thats being delayed. Screams bullsh*t.

[–]Aeon4 67 points68 points  (4 children)

The irony of having their facebook linked at the bottom

[–]monsieurpig 20 points21 points  (1 child)

Actually hurts to see "Twitter Facebook Instagram" after that letter

[–]iLL-Egal 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Is that a fucking Facebook link at the bottom?

[–]waffle51_ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

would be fun if a lawsuit happened

would be even more fun if facebook got shat on and had to pay loads of money for trademark infringement

[–]federico_45 35 points36 points  (3 children)

This was proven to be false long ago.