The Good NET Guide

Posts Tagged ‘clarifying’

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]

Crunch Network: CrunchBase the free database of technology companies, people, and investors

For a service that is all about concise messaging, it’s humorous how the manner in which Twitter writes its blog posts is anything but. For the second time in as many days, we have yet another post today about the supposed Twitter TV show. This one is a clarification of the clarification from yesterday. It’s similar to how Twitter needed no less than 4 blog posts on one topic a few weeks ago to explain something (the changing of the @replies).

Here’s what the latest says: Twitter is not making a TV show. Instead, some “Hollywood folks” are, but Twitter has “little to do with their efforts but we wish them success,” Twitter co-founder Biz Stone clarifies. Of course, this is exactly what he said yesterday, as I outlined, but he said it in a very indirect way. So now we get a second post. The problem is that a massive number of Twitter users are still tweeting out that Twitter is basically developing its own show. The power of the retweet is keeping this story going. And now even CNN is covering super-celeb-user Ashton Kutcher threatening to boycott if they go through with it.

So let’s be clear once again:

What Twitter is doing: Lending its support and probably branding to at least one television show produced by Reveille and Brillstein. Others are in the works as well.

What Twitter is not doing: Making its own show, starring anyone from Twitter, or really distracting it from anything else it’s working on.

Why this matters: First and foremost, this is a business deal. And Twitter will make money from this — though it doesn’t state that. Long term though, Twitter thinks its platform can be leveraged beyond web applications, and can be the backbone of entertainment experiences, among other things. Basically, Twitter is thinking of itself as a new communication medium (which has been noted several times in the past) and a TV show totally built around Twitter is an interesting step in proving/disproving that with the mainstream public.

That is all. At least until the inevitable post tomorrow further clarifying the situation.

Crunch Network: CrunchBoard because it’s time for you to find a new Job2.0