There’s been quite a bit of controversy over the past several hours over words and images related to Twitter being used by third-party developers. Yesterday, Twitter seemed to threaten one party over the use of the word “tweet” and some UI elements that were similar to Twitter’s own. This morning, Twitter co-founder Biz Stone clarified Twitter’s position on this a bit for us, stating that, “As part of this support, we encourage developers of new applications and services built using Twitter APIs to invent original branding for their projects rather than use our marks, logos, or look and feel.”
But there was still some confusion about what Twitter was actually saying, and more importantly, what it was planning to do with violators of this. So now Stone has written a blog post further clarifying things.
Here’s the key nugget:
We have applied to trademark Tweet because it is clearly attached to Twitter from a brand perspective but we have no intention of “going after” the wonderful applications and services that use the word in their name when associated with Twitter. In fact, we encourage the use of the word Tweet. However, if we come across a confusing or damaging project, the recourse to act responsibly to protect both users and our brand is important.
So there you go, feel free to use the word “tweet” in your projects. But use it wisely.
However, the use of the word “Twitter” is something the company is going to look down upon:
Regarding the use of the word Twitter in projects, we are a bit more wary although there are some exceptions here as well. After all, Twitter is the name of our service and our company so the potential for confusion is much higher. When folks ask us about naming their application with “Twitter” we generally respond by suggesting more original branding for their project. This avoids potential confusion down the line.
That makes sense since it is the actual name of the company after all. And it does need to do some basic protection of its name.
[photo: flickr/d'arcy norman]
Reasonable.
totally understandable, not really a big deal – surprised they didn’t do it earlier.
I am going to trademark twatter just in case.
It’s cool that they support the idea of people using Tweet in 3rd party programs. Going on a “suing-spree” wouldn’t really get them much anyway other then chump change and their users signing up to Facebook.
Agreed, except most (non-commercial) Twitter users had a presence on Facebook before they joined Twitter.
TC didnt report the source and diverted the topic. Just Saw this article: http://www.fwd2tweet.com/18/
So http://tweetKnot.com actually received this mail from twitter and tweetknot actually agreed to change the UI
“actaully agreed to change the UI”?? it’s a complete UI rip-off
No shit. They’ve even copied the background image from Twitter. It looks like a phishing site.
They don’t own the word Twitter, it is in the DICTIONARY.
So is the word Apple. And Coke. And Nike. And Yahoo. And Blockbuster. I can go on all day.
You, NoCanDo, are retarded.
Actually, Steven, NoCanDo is no retard. Trademark laws are. I can’t see any reason why anyone would even suggest I can’t call my kid, for example, Nike, after the greek goddess, or quote Vonnegut’s apocalyptic dream of silence and bird chrips: Tweet. Tweet.
The dictionary, like trademark laws, do not control freedom of speech nor language. Supporting Twitter on this is a classic case of a “do no evil” company doing some evil, and we’re as its audience, are saying: “Well, it’s just SOME evil, so fine”.
It’s not the dictionary that controls. It is whether there is a likelihood of confusion to the public as to the source of goods and services. Delta Airlines and Delta Faucets do not infringe on each other’s trademarks.
You’re absolutely right, jf.sellsius. But think of of Anders Celsius and then think of your own nickname. Now, multiply by Modern Corporatism and add 5. Result: Potential Infringement.
You _are_ right, but on the moral side, trademarks set certain limits to the freedom of language and speech and to the freedom of action.
@tomerlichtash
Indeed, you are correct, sir. Trademark law sets limits on speech and action. But only commercial speech and commercial action. You and I, as individuals, not in pursuit of the almighty Dollar, are free to tweet and twitter to our heart’s delight, immune from restriction, moral or otherwise.
correct, it is contextual as well. Coca-Cola is perfectly within their rights when protecting Coke from all those (from the south) who might refer to any dark fizzy drink as a coke, but have no control over the use of coke when it is referring to snortables.
exactly!
Twitter already stops any new twitter handle with the name twitter in it. It also stops any twitter Full Name to have the word twitter in there.
This is more to protect competition from calling their status updates as “tweets’, which seems fair. But it won’t stop us users from saying we want to tweet even when we post status updates to facebook or gmail.
The fact that they applied for a Trademark to a generic term they did not invent such as “tweet” is no more less backwards than paris hilton attempting to TM the phrase “that’s hot”
It shows the EGO of corporations, and people. The entire english dictionary is almost trademarked, because our psuedo laws allow it. Thousands of domains such as Rocky.com and LH.com have been reverse-hijacked because of the current state of TM law.
The ownership of words is a farce, and something must be done to stop the infinite wave of frivolous lawsuits pertaining to one companies current popularity and ego.
This coming from someone who helps monetize pages for domain squatters and who probably squats many domains of his own.
Ummm, about 3 years too late. They haven’t challenged anything related to their brand (even encouraged it), so there is no way to enforce this.
Before “Tweetgate” erupted this morning, yesterday I was saying that “tweetosphere” is my preferred term for the microblogosphere that is Twitter. What do Twitter users do? They tweet and retweet. I think it’s appropriate for the world of tweets to be called the “tweetosphere”. “Twitterverse” or “twittersphere” isn’t as suiting. Twitter is just the medium in which one tweets. The “blogosphere” isn’t the “WordPressosphere” or the “TypePadosphere”. It is the blogosphere–a community of blogs. Similarly, the tweetosphere is the community of tweets. Twitter is the proper name of a service provider that hosts a platform for tweeting.
I laughed really hard. Thanks.
Had I not known what I was looking at I could have easily confused http://tweetKnot.com with Twitter. I see their point and I have to agree with Twitter.
Using tweet in the name of something shouldn’t be as big if an issue. If you blatantly have the Twitter name in your product then you need to rethink your branding.
Biz can’t have it both ways. The more services that Twitter “allows” to use the mark, the weaker the mark becomes. Any “bad apple” infringer with a decent attorney would certainly use the existence (and public blessing!) of “tweetdeck” in their defense. So this still begs the question: why file for a trademark when you are so willing to abandon it from the get go? Biz’s stated purpose (to go only after bad apples) makes no sense IMHO.
It’s also worth noting that even the registered “Twitter” mark is weak, given the long existence and tacit approval of apps like Twitterific and Twittervision, etc.
I continue to laugh at bloggers who feel people care whether they “anoint” their approval on things that are so much more important and relevant than they are.
Twitter is a company who has every right to protect it’s name and file a trademark, whether you think it “makes sense” or not.
Maybe you should start a consulting company for people to run patents, trademarks, lawsuits by you to check if they “make sense”. I’m sure they’d be lining up for your services.
[crickets chirping]
Again like I said in my comment on the other post, who are these ppl to apply for a trademark on the word tweet? I mean, Twitter Inc has no rights whatsoever to apply for a trademark on the dictionary word, let alone be granted one.
We shd all sue twitter. Thats what shd happen.
I guess this means they are planning on giving Leo Laporte his name back. I have been a twitter for years (follower of This Week in Tech). Leo could have sued Twitter years ago as he has used Twit as a service mark for years. They better tread very carefully with their name and trademarking
Well my pocket Oxford english dictionary (printed on actual real paper!) includes the words ‘tweet’, ‘tweeter’ and ‘twitter’ and clearly twitter.com chose that name for its real english meaning so trying to trademark or limit its use in anyway is doomed to failure.
I for one will continue to tweet and twitter to my hearts content, it is my language and I’ll use it how I want.
I swear I went to lunch with Biz two years ago and he didn’t like when I said tweet.
So now TwitterFox is in trouble.
Worst case scenario, TwitterFox could become TweetFox or something similar.
good point, using someones name is growing their brand, this is just greed…
My god the idiots here who believe a word can’t be used as a trademark if it’s in the dictionary.
Leo Leporte should sue ‘em for creating the confusion between TWIT and Twitter; and that Twitter which doesn’t mean really anything unlike This Week in Tech should be renamed, or pay residuals to Leo for life.
Honestly, the lifespan of twitter is about 2 more years.
Look at MySpace, it’s pretty much dead. I suspect Facebook will go that way in about a year.
These are websites, single, solitary, individual websites. They rely on a userbase. Twitter is lucky that they have 3rd party developers creating applications, and they are lucky that iPhone users are major adopters.
Twitter is best experienced for mobile users and other standalone apps. Browsers don’t do it justice.
In 2 years we’ll be talking about the next big thing. Probably a service that converts your voice to readable posts. Get hot! I’m waiting.
yeah, but most people don’t give a damn about TWiT
Twitterfox, DestroyTwitter, etc. I see a few name changes rolling down the hills.
Twitter has long since lost the opportunity to defend itself and its supposed trademarks.
Use of the word Twitter is now in the public domain because they failed to defend against improper use when it was first infringed upon.
I use the word twitter in my product http://www.MyTwitterButler.com
So sue me.
Cheers,
Dean
Not sure if anyone noticed but Twitter has yet to be awarded a trademark for the name Twitter. It came within in one day of letting its application lapse and then refiled.
Twitter does indeed own a U.S. trademark registration for TWITTER. See:
http://tarr.usp...;entry=77166246
Filing Date: 2007-04-26
took them a year to trade mark,,,,obviously did not believe in it in the beginning 2006
Dude that was the funniest thing I ever heard! Tweet, Tweet! LOL
RT
http://www.complete-privacy.tk
Here’s the active trademark application for Twitter: http://tarr.usp...;entry=77721751
“Current Status: Newly filed application, not yet assigned to an examining attorney.”
That application is just for the new stylized logo; the word itself was actually approved in 2007.
I think they are making the right move even if they were a little late at doing so. It
We are a causality in this process but it worked in our favor. Our client was “Twitter for iPhone”. It was the first iPhone Twitter client thus the name was very specific to what it was. We received a letter from Twitter asking us to change it recently. We ended up totally reinventing it as Logpost.com and it is now performing much better. They are right, Twitter should not be used as the name of anything but their service. It is going to be a really tough pill to swallow for many developers. If it works out well maybe your product can benefit from the renaming.
For nearly a year, I and about 20,000 other people (and growing) have been members of a social networking site that includes Twitter in its name. The site owner uses the corresponding name in her Twitter URL. The site has healthy ad revenues and “Twitter” is the most prominent part of the site name. This will be an interesting experience for a lot of people — not just Twitter.
Speaking of trademarks; today, I was looking through the USPTO Gazette for something when I stumbled across Facebook’s application for a trademark in three distinct categories, with two separate distinctions in each category related to social media, communication, etc…
I also came across Apple’s mark for the iPhone, which also seeks to be protected under multiple categories.
The USPTO Gazette from June 23rd, 2009 is the vehicle in which I uncovered this information. It’s 1,900 pages as a PDF, and not searchable. Why? Because it’s like a scan of a hard copy, instead of a Word doc or something like that. You’ll have to scroll.
Here’s the link:
http://www.uspt...20090623_OG.pdf
That doesn’t make sense. We’ve submitted our application’s name to Twitter Inc, via their online form. And they’ve already accepted.
Trademarks don’t matter — Domains Matter.
CBS gets it (they bought the CNET portfolio).
NBCU gets it (they bought weather.COM).
They may have paid too much for buying .COM names (my gut instinct is that weather.INFO might be equally or even more valuable than weather.COM).
And of course Biz and Ev were smart to build a brand on the otherwise dormant “twitter” meme.
They really won’t be able to force people to always mean exactly “COMmercial twitter” (the web address) when they use the term “twitter”, but it won’t even really matter: As people increasingly use the Wisdom of the Language ( http://gaggle.i...of-the-language ) to navigate the web, they stand to be sitting pretty and chirp along their merry little song of sixpence all the way to the bank… — or at least until people start using sites like “rumors” or “people” (and/or until the people running such sites begin to realize that their main problem they have is their own lack of understanding of the web).
I was, however, recently AMAZED (yet again!
at how VAST the IGNORANCE of the web is among many traditional publishers.
But at least SOME PEOPLE are catching on to it, and not just Biz, Ev, CBS and NBCU — the President of the United States himself recognized the power of “causes, has started “change”, is working on “recover”, the list goes on and on….
Then they sue all birds
A tweeter who tweets on twtter
Tried 2 twist 2 twits 2 tweet
Said 2 twits 2 the twitter
Is it harder 2 tweet,
or 2 twist two twits 2 tweet?
Think they would have any issue using the T in their logo and modifying it to use as a logo?
Interesting article… as I just launched a Twitter game, and it’s very much themed like their site.
Well you have to admit we all kind of saw this coming.
Great ..!!! maybe i can try Tweet ..!! hahaha
What Biz Stone and Evan Williams have accomplished with “Twitter” in such a short time is absolutely incredible…this response by Biz is simply another example of their foresight & brilliance!!!
A lot of people and businesses have these guys to twank…!!!
they had 55 million! Would could you do with that?
It is people spreading the word that has built twitter,
It is reasonable, no surprise. This is just to avoid overusing the word “tweet” and to prevent those bad guys using it for their own ill motive.
Hi
Is using the word twitter a problem? There a number of sites that use twitter in their domain name?
If sites were using techcrunchgetmoretraffic.com (and drove people to your site) would you have a problem with it (unless it was unethical of course) ? …and there were thousands, more would you have a problem. All roads lead to Rome. If there is a symbiotic relationship – surely working together is the better for all, Russell
PS
The is a movie with my name as a character in it, I get a lot hits because of that, should I trade mark my name so no-one can use it?, I would lose “business” I dont ride it, but I could…
I could never trade mark my name because other people have it, was no one using the word twitter before twitter. There was a cartoon character using “tweets’” or tweet , cant quite remember, but that was 30 years ago….unfair that someone can be the ‘owner’.
There are sites using twitter in their domain name which drive traffic to twitter, and those people make money out it and give twitter a higher ranking on the net, how can they not use the name twitter to sell a product that involves ‘twitter’ or tweet
this is a commercial world and why is twitter around (to make money at some stage, that is another issue, all these sites with huge traffic that dont make money or how to ??? )
sorry you go me started,
if a site has twitter or tweet in it, and has millions of hits which link back to twitter thought follow me, would twitter have a problem with it, ? Should not..
nike trade marking “just do it” is just BS ,, that is the english
lol funny story……… Came home from work tonight to find out I’m being sued by Twitter
http://www.MyTw...27m_Being_Sued/
I think Twitter is forgetting what made them so popular in the first place – third party application developers who built apps to add value to the twittersphere in the first place.