Dean, please let us know how it comes out with your rename suggestion of MyTweetButler.com That would set a real precedent for Tweet. I would be sort of surprised if they would commit that to you, but that would be very helpful.. Good luck..dm
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Dean Collins <d...@cognation.net> wrote: > > Hey Stuart, > > I'm glad someone else posted they were being pursued by Twitters Legal > representatives apart from myself. > > (I'm still waiting for answers to my questions so nothing new to report > here). > > Do you feel that their real beef is using the word "Twit" in your URL? > > I put a counter proposal to Twitters legal representative to rename my > application www.MyTweetButler.com <http://www.mytweetbutler.com/> which as > per Biz Stone's blog post of July 1st he indicated he was very happy with > 3rd party developers to use the word "Tweet" > http://blog.twitter.com/2009/07/may-tweets-be-with-you.html#links > > There have also been discussions online that although Twitter inc have > applied for a trademark for Tweet (not granted yet) that the term was > actually coined by an end user so Twitter would actually have a lot of > problems if they decided to pursue people with the word Tweet in their name. > > Do you think that this will satisfy them? > > > > > Regards, > Dean Collins > d...@mytwitterbutler.com > +1-212-203-4357 New York > +61-2-9016-5642 (Sydney in-dial). > +44-20-3129-6001 (London in-dial). > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com [mailto: > twitter-development-t...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Twitlonger > Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 6:33 PM > To: Twitter Development Talk > Subject: [twitter-dev] Cease & Desist from Twitter > > > I recently got a letter by email from a UK law firm representing > Twitter claiming that my website www.twitlonger.com was infringing on > their trade mark and was inherently likely to confuse users. The > version of the website they were objecting to didn't have a similar > font but did use the same birds as the old version of the site (fair > enough to be asked to remove them). > > The timing coincided with a redesign of the site anyway which went > live this week. I emailed them back pointing this out and then ended > up on the phone with them with the claim being that the site as it > stands now could still be seen as "potentially confusing". I want to > know how different they expect a site to be (especially when it > doesn't even include the full word "twitter" in the name. Compare this > to Twitpic, Twitvid etc who are using the same contraction AND the > same typeface. > > This feels so much like a legal department doing stuff that is > completely contrary to the Twitter team who have been so supportive of > the third party community. Of course, all these applications have been > granted access to be listed in the posted from field in the tweets, > been granted special access to the API via whitelisting which requires > the application to be named and described and, in many cases, been > registered with OAuth, again requiring the name and description of the > app. > > Has anyone else received similar letters where they have no problem > with the service but can't seem to tell the difference between two > sites if blue is present in each? > > :( > > Letter copied below. > --- > TWITTER - Trade Mark and Website Presentation Issues > We act for Twitter, Inc. in relation to intellectual property issues > in the UK. > Twitter has asked us to contact you about your ww.twitlonger.comwebsite > (the..Website..).Twitter > has no objection to the service which you are offering on the Website. > However, Twitter does need > you to make certain changes to the Website. We have set out the > reasons below. > Your Website > Twitter owns a number of registrations for its TWITTER trade mark, > including Community trade mark > registration number 6392997. Your use of a name for the Website which > is based on the TWITTER > trade mark is inherently likely to confuse users of the ww.twitter.com > website into thinking that the > Website is owned or operated by Twitter, when this is not the case. > You are using a font on your Website which is very similar to that > used by Twitter for its TWITTER > logo. You have no doubt chosen to use this font for this very reason. > You are also using a blue > background and representations of blue birds. These blue birds are > identical to those which Twitter > has previously used on the www.twitter.com website. The combination of > these factors and the name > of your Website inevitably increase the likelihood of confusion. > We therefore ask you to confirm that you will, within seven days of > giving the confirmation: > 1. incorporate a prominent non-affiliation disclaimer on all pages of > the Website; > 2. permanently stop any use on the Website of a font which is > identical or similar to the font used by > Twitter for its TWITTER logo; and > 3. permanently stop any use on the Website of (i) representations of > blue birds which are identical or > similar to the blue bird design previously or currently used by > Twitter on the www.twitter.com > website; and (ii) a blue background. > -- Dale Merritt Fol.la MeDia, LLC
