Protecting Your Trademark on Facebook
Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.11.09
Facebook®, the popular social networking system, has announced that starting at 12:01 a.m. (EDT) on Saturday, June 13, 2009, its users will be allowed to create personalized URLs. (see http://blog.facebook.com/blog.php?post=90316352130). This raises the possibility that some Facebook users may try to incorporate third party trademarks as part of their new URLs.
In anticipation of this possibility, Facebook has established an online form to be used by trademark owners interested in protecting their trademarks from being registered as usernames. (Click here: Facebook - Preventing the Registration of a Username). The online form is simple and, barring technical complications, should be easy to use. It is unknown as to how effective this system will turn out to be but there may be be little downside to the process. Unfortunately, Facebook has given minimal advance notice of this new development and trademark owners who wish to take full advantage of this system should consider submitting the online form prior to the commencement of the new URL registration program on Saturday June 13.
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
