Chilling Effects
Home Weather Reports Report Receiving a Cease and Desist Notice Search the Database Topics
Sending
Topic HomeFAQsMonitoring the legal climate for Internet activity
Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic
 Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > Anticircumvention (DMCA) > Notices > Facebook Contends that Plug-ins Thwart Privacy Measures (NoticeID 26020) Printer-friendly version

Facebook Contends that Plug-ins Thwart Privacy Measures

March 12, 2008

 

Sender Information:
Facebook
Sent by:
[Private]


Palo Alto, CA, USA

Recipient Information:
[Private]



USA


Sent via: email
Re: Please see attached

Dear [private]:

I am writing you concerning the Firefox extensions you posted at:

1) www.chrisfinke.com/addons/facebook-image-to-email and
2) www.chrisfinke.com/addons/facebook-scavenger

These plug-ins are deeply concerning to Facebook because, among other things, they violate Facebook's trademark rights, its Term of Service, the security of the site and Facebook user privacy. For example, the facebook-image-to-email extension permits people to circumvent Facebook security measures that protect user privacy and the scavenger extension allows people to harvest data off the site in contravention of the Terms of Service and also infringes upon user privacy. A colleague of mine here at Facebook already articulated how your extensions violate the Terms of Service in a series of emails with you on or about January 4, 2008, so I will not repeat them here, but our concerns remain.

I note your stated concern for the visually impaired and understand from your emails that you are legally blind in one eye. You can reset assured that Facebook's interests are to include people with visual impairments in the Facebook community. Indeed there are already numerous Facebook groups concerning issues faced by the visually impaired and we are proud of that. I also welcome a constructive conversation with you on your ideas on how we might be able to improve our site experience for people with visual impairments but not at the cost of user privacy and the other concerns noted above. Notwithstanding your concerns, it is impermissible for you to unilaterally implement measures that thwart Facebook security, threaten user privacy and violate Facebook's rights.

I insist that you immediately take down the extensions listed above. I understand that this is the second time you have been asked to remove the problematic material. I further understand that after the first warning you removed the material, evidently aware of the problems the extensions posed, but then placed the extensions back on your website despite our fair warnings. If you fail to permanently and immediately remove the extensions and cease distributing them, Facebook will be forced to become more formal in its effort to protect its rights and the rights of users. Hopefully you won't choose that path.

Feel free to contact me to discuss.

Sincerely,

[signed]
[private]
Deputy General Counsel

 
FAQ: Questions and Answers

[back to notice text]


Question: What can be protected as a trademark?

Answer: You can protect

  • names (such as company names, product names)
  • domain names if they label a product or service
  • images
  • symbols
  • logos
  • slogans or phrases
  • colors
  • product design
  • product packaging (known as trade dress)


[back to notice text]


Question: What exactly are the rights a trademark owner has?

Answer: In the US, trademark rights come from actual use of the mark to label one's services or products or they come from filing an application with the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) that states an intention to use the mark in future commerce. In most foreign countries, trademarks are valid only upon registration.

There are two trademark rights: the right to use (or authorize use) and the right to register.

The person who establishes priority rights in a mark gains the exclusive right to use it to label or identify their goods or services, and to authorize others to do so. According to the Lanham Act, determining who has priority rights in a mark involves establishing who was the first to use it to identify his/her goods.

The PTO determines who has the right to register the mark. Someone who registers a trademark with the intent to use it gains "constructive use" when he/she begins using it, which entitles him/her to nationwide priority in the mark. However, if two users claim ownership of the same mark (or similar marks) at the same time, and neither has registered it, a court must decide who has the right to the mark. The court can issue an injunction (a ruling that requires other people to stop using the mark) or award damages if people other than the owner use the trademark (infringement).

Trademark owners do not acquire the exclusive ownership of words. They only obtain the right to use the mark in commerce and to prevent competitors in the same line of goods or services from using a confusingly similar mark. The same word can therefore be trademarked by different producers to label different kinds of goods. Examples are Delta Airlines and Delta Faucets.

Owners of famous marks have broader rights to use their marks than do owners of less-well-known marks. They can prevent uses of their marks by others on goods that do not even compete with the famous product.


[back to notice text]


Question: What are the limits of trademark rights?

Answer: There are many limits, including:

  • Fair Use
    There are two situations where the doctrine of fair use prevents infringement:
    1. The term is a way to describe another good or service, using its descriptive term and not its secondary meaning. The idea behind this fair use is that a trademark holder does not have the exclusive right to use a word that is merely descriptive, since this decreases the words available to describe. If the term is not used to label any particular goods or services at all, but is perhaps used in a literary fashion as part of a narrative, then this is a non-commercial use even if the narrative is commercially sold.
    2. Nominative fair use
      This is when a potential infringer (or defendant) uses the registered trademark to identify the trademark holder's product or service in conjunction with his or her own. To invoke this defense, the defendant must prove the following elements:
      • the product or service cannot be readily identified without the mark
      • he/she only uses as much of the mark as is necessary to identify the goods or services
      • he/she does nothing with the mark to suggest that the trademark holder has given his approval to the defendant
  • Parody Use
    Parodies of trademarked products have traditionally been permitted in print and other media publications. A parody must convey two simultaneous -- and contradictory -- messages: that it is the original, but also that it is not the original and is instead a parody.
  • Non-commercial Use
    If no income is solicited or earned by using someone else's mark, this use is not normally infringement. Trademark rights protect consumers from purchasing inferior goods because of false labeling. If no goods or services are being offered, or the goods would not be confused with those of the mark owner, or if the term is being used in a literary sense, but not to label or otherwise identify the origin of other goods or services, then the term is not being used commercially.
  • Product Comparison and News Reporting
    Even in a commercial use, you can refer to someone else?s goods by their trademarked name when comparing them to other products. News reporting is also exempt.
  • Geographic Limitations
    A trademark is protected only within the geographic area where the mark is used and its reputation is established. For federally registered marks, protection is nationwide. For other marks, geographical use must be considered. For example, if John Doe owns the mark Timothy's Bakery in Boston, there is not likely to be any infringement if Jane Roe uses Timothy's Bakery to describe a bakery in Los Angeles. They don't sell to the same customers, so those customers aren't confused.
  • Non-competing or Non-confusing Use
    Trademark rights only protect the particular type of goods and services that the mark owner is selling under the trademark. Some rights to expansion into related product lines have been recognized, but generally, if you are selling goods or services that do not remotely compete with those of the mark owner, this is generally strong evidence that consumers would not be confused and that no infringement exists. This defense may not exist if the mark is a famous one, however. In dilution cases, confusion is not the standard, so use on any type of good or service might cause infringement by dilution of a famous mark.


[back to notice text]


Question: What are technological protection measures?

Answer: Technological protection systems are already in place in DVDs, eBooks, video game consoles, robotic toys, Internet streaming, and password-protected sections of web sites. The fact that a digital protection may be really weak and easy to circumvent has not prevented courts from applying this law to punish those who bypass them.

The DMCA defines an access control mechanism as a measure which "in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work." [1201(a)(3)(B)] An access control is a technology, like a password or encryption that controls who or what is able to interact with the copyrighted work. It is a violation of the DMCA to circumvent access controls, but it is also a violation to provide tools to others that circumvent access controls (including selling, distributing free of charge, and possibly even linking to a site with such technology ? or even the source code).

The DMCA defines a copy control mechanism as a measure which, "in the ordinary course of its operation, prevents, restricts, or otherwise limits the exercise of a right of a copyright owner." [1201(b)(2)(B)]. Technological systems designed to protect against copyright infringement control whether the work can be copied, how many copies can be made, how long you can have possession of the work, etc. It is a violation of the DMCA to provide tools to others that circumvent copy controls [1201(b)], but it is not a violation of the DMCA to engage in the act of circumventing copy controls. Rather, the provision serves to buttress prohibitions against infringing activities of traditional copyright law.


[back to notice text]


Question: What does circumvention mean?

Answer: Circumvention, according to Section 1201(a)(3)(A), means "to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner." While the full scope of activities and practices that would fall under this definition has not yet been examined by the courts, any act of undoing a "lock" or "block" in a digital system may well be considered circumvention.


[back to notice text]


Question: What are technological protection measures?

Answer: Technological protection systems are already in place in DVDs, eBooks, video game consoles, robotic toys, Internet streaming, and password-protected sections of web sites. The fact that a digital protection may be really weak and easy to circumvent has not prevented courts from applying this law to punish those who bypass them.

The DMCA defines an access control mechanism as a measure which "in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work." [1201(a)(3)(B)] An access control is a technology, like a password or encryption that controls who or what is able to interact with the copyrighted work. It is a violation of the DMCA to circumvent access controls, but it is also a violation to provide tools to others that circumvent access controls (including selling, distributing free of charge, and possibly even linking to a site with such technology ? or even the source code).

The DMCA defines a copy control mechanism as a measure which, "in the ordinary course of its operation, prevents, restricts, or otherwise limits the exercise of a right of a copyright owner." [1201(b)(2)(B)]. Technological systems designed to protect against copyright infringement control whether the work can be copied, how many copies can be made, how long you can have possession of the work, etc. It is a violation of the DMCA to provide tools to others that circumvent copy controls [1201(b)], but it is not a violation of the DMCA to engage in the act of circumventing copy controls. Rather, the provision serves to buttress prohibitions against infringing activities of traditional copyright law.


Topic maintained by Samuelson Law, Technology and Public Policy Clinic

Topic Frequently Asked Questions (and Answers)
Chilling Effects Clearinghouse - www.chillingeffects.org
disclaimer / privacy / about us & contacts