On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:13:12 -0700 (PDT)
Mike Langford wrote:
> Twitter will also have to inform other existing clients, like
> Twiterific and TwitterBerry, to cease and desist as well if it hopes
> for a success application.
I'm not sure the situation is that set in stone.
If Twitter wants an
IANAL, but I don't think all is doom and gloom, or at least not as
doomy and goomy as previous posts to this thread (Including one of
mine, if it is not read as tongue-in-cheek, as intended) portray.
Yes, if you have a trademark, you have to aggressively defend it or
risk losing it. No, completel
did you really expect them to allow something that clearly violated their
TOS to use the Twitter name? There are plenty of apps out there that add
Real Value(TM) to Twitter's community.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 13:05, Dale Merritt wrote:
> You're right, they could decide to grant you the right to
You're right, they could decide to grant you the right to use it. Good luck
with that. Keep building up that brand then and cross your fingers. Sounds
like a sound assumption.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 9:20 AM, Dale Merritt wrote:
>
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 9:20 AM, Dale Merritt wrote:
> Don't waste your time. If you have Twitter in your domain name, you could
> be put out of business if you don't cease and desist. I've seen it first
> hand. They bury you in a law suit, wrong or right is not the point. These
> companies ha
Don't waste your time. If you have Twitter in your domain name, you could
be put out of business if you don't cease and desist. I've seen it first
hand. They bury you in a law suit, wrong or right is not the point. These
companies have a huge lawyer group and bat you around for fun.
My suggesti
On Aug 13, 12:13 pm, Mike Langford wrote:
> Should be fun to watch.
Except for those who have worked very hard for many months to build up
services with "twitter" in the domain name.
Dewald
In short, Twitter has filed a trademark application and in doing so
they must attempt to defend the name if they hope to be awarded
trademark protection. Twitter allowed its original application to
lapse and refiled on April 29, 2009.
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4003:eq5aoa.2
Spam is anything in your inbox caused by a third party and not desired
by you. Period. Get over the semantics already. If it were possible to
opt-out of "all bambibot, SEObot and other spambot accounts" on
Twitter, then sure, getting bot follow notifications in your inbox
would NOT be spam. Unfort
+1 and well explained Chris, thanks.
On 13 Aug 2009, at 08:38, Chris Babcock wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:50:24 -0700 (PDT)
Dewald Pretorius wrote:
It may be an irritation and it may cost you money, but it is NOT
spam.
You opted in to receive the notifications on your phone, and hence
In the final analysis, I think we should express sympathy for the API
team. They're great guys, and they are busting their butts to help us
succeed.
This action appears to be an example of where another part of the
Twitter organization did something that makes their lives hell.
Chin up, guys. I
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:50:24 -0700 (PDT)
Dewald Pretorius wrote:
> It may be an irritation and it may cost you money, but it is NOT spam.
>
> You opted in to receive the notifications on your phone, and hence it
> is NOT spam.
If you have an email account sent notices to your IMs when you hav
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:17:38 -0600
Bioscience News wrote:
> All this stuff about following being equated to spamming is nonsense.
First, the act of following someone usually generates a message. When
you first join Twitter, it's exciting to get new followers and you look
forward to those messa
I would give my legs to stop all those "Social media expert" types
following me because I said something, it's god awful constantly
having "Bob "I make $100,000 a day and you can too just sign up for
this $500 product through my referral link" is now following you!"
emails.
uh, off topic.
On 8/12/09 6:14 PM, Robert Fishel wrote:
My Twitter Butler falls into the nuclear missile category. I can think
of no legitimate uses for wanting to follow 400 people who input any
keyword.
Then, you're not very creative or inspired. Read on ...
You could make the case of a niche market, I
Obligatory Wikipedia link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Neil Ellis wrote:
>
> Someone remind me again who was it that saw this record breaking thread
> coming . :-)
>
> I think the only thing that hasn't been discussed is the very nature of life
> it
Someone remind me again who was it that saw this record breaking
thread coming . :-)
I think the only thing that hasn't been discussed is the very nature
of life itself :-)
peace
Neil
On 12 Aug 2009, at 23:04, Gonzalo Larralde wrote:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:48 PM, Dean Collins
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:48 PM, Dean Collins wrote:
> Any other developer being sued by Twitter today?
"Basically it's a WINDOWS XP .net application, if you have a mac and
you stupidly purchase this and it doesn't workgo bitch to Steve
Jobs." [0]
"If you buy this and it doesn't do what you
David,
It's called HUMOR.
If your head hurts don't blame us - reduce the self-induced strain
from trying to live a humorless life and you'll be ok.
Untwist your bonnet a bit and relax - - -
As a reminder: Labeling an indiscriminate group of people stupid is a
stupid way to try to establish your
Just because in all cases you can't define premeditated murder doesn't
mean that premeditated murder isn't universally wrong.
"One person considers being followed by someone they don't want to be
followed by to be spam. Others don't."
Very true, however when you ask that same person if being fo
You completely missed the point of my post. It is a simple call to ethical
analysis of the situation. Deeming different situations with similar
outcomes (mass following or unwanted solicitation) I asked for simple
justification of the community at large. In fact had I left out Deans name
it coul
This incident bounced around in my head today. I think Twitter does
not like the essential nature of this application, to contact members
of its userbase. I would like to know what users of the premium
Twitter Butler product included in their messages. I am designing a
mass-contact model now, and
Jeremy,
The problem with your logic is that you don't feel that a company can
set a ToS for how they want users to use their service. They can.
There are legitimate and non-legitimate uses of Twitter. This guy
screwed up, and overreacted. Case closed. Twitter's got him on the
naming issue and th
On 12 Aug 2009, at 21:50, Jeremy Darling wrote:
PS: The app in #4 could easily be setup so that twitter users could
mark an account as a possible spammer, once the account reaches a
known threashold that account could then be auto-blocked.
+1
Warning, atypical post to follow: After quite a while of watching this
conversation, and some thought into the "problem", I wonder if the following
scenarios are held in the same view:
1) Amy W (from HR Block you all know who I'm talking about) started using
Twitter to gain insight into her compan
On Aug 12, 5:23 pm, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
> In the end, I would hope that Twitter would create ways of punishing the
> abusive users and not Twitter Karma.
Amen.
Should Home Depot be closed down because some people injure themselves
with the hammers they buy there?
Dewald
On 8/12/09 3:44 PM, Robert Fishel wrote:
There are universal wrongs. Guns aren't on of them. Premeditated murder is.
So is spam.
Suppose you're right. Is it so very clear what premeditated murder is
in all cases? How about spam?
One person considers being followed by someone they don't wa
On 8/12/09 3:18 PM, Vincent Wright wrote:
None of us actually know how this might turn out but, even recognizing
that this could become an uncomfortable matter for MyTwitterButler
and/or Twitter, I nonetheless, decided to ask the question regarding
the 1942 movie Bambi:
"Would Twitter Sue Bambi
Too good, very nice.
On Aug 12, 2009, at 12:18 PM, Vincent Wright wrote:
"Would Twitter Sue Bambi For Being Twitterpated? :-) ":
http://mylinkingpowerforum.ning.com/group/twitterpated/forum/topics/would-twitter-sue-bambi-for
--
Scott * If you contact me off list replace talklists@ with scott
@Vincent
No. Do you not understand that Trademark infringements occur between
things that could be mistaken for each other or in the same industry,
diluting a brand?
A Disney film from the 1940's has what to do with a 3rd part
application for a 2006-present social network?
There is a CLEAR conne
No I don't see what you did there
There are universal wrongs. Guns aren't on of them. Premeditated murder is.
So is spam.
Maybe I'm slow but what are you trying to get at?
-Bob
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
>
*SNIP*
> Universal wrongs?
>
> YOU are WRONG.
>
> Guns d
None of us actually know how this might turn out but, even recognizing
that this could become an uncomfortable matter for MyTwitterButler
and/or Twitter, I nonetheless, decided to ask the question regarding
the 1942 movie Bambi:
"Would Twitter Sue Bambi For Being Twitterpated? :-) ":
http://mylink
On Aug 12, 2009, at 11:42 AM, Dewald Pretorius wrote:
Personally I think that is a mutilation of the use and purpose of
Twitter. I surely hope people would not judge me based on who is
following me.
I would not judge you. No, I never take it that far. However,
consider if a politician was
Note to self: Before painting, first pinpoint all the corners in the
room.
@Thread,
They're not going to be able to force dean to transfer his domain to them.
His domain name isn't confusing, as twitter.com as well established. He also
has a legitimate claim to the domain, regardless of how legitimate the
service that serves as that claim may be. Perhaps they should go i
I used to ass well, this does not work well when number grow.
On Aug 12, 2009, at 11:54 AM, JDG wrote:
sure they do. it's called "blocking". every time a pain in the ass
porn bot or "social media expert" following 100x more people than
follow them follows me, i block them. then they can't f
But let me immediately add, that is on a technical definition of
spam.
I am fully aware that most people would label as "spam" any DM that
they do not like.
On Aug 12, 4:03 pm, Dewald Pretorius wrote:
> Adam,
>
> I know this is off the topic of the thread, but along the same vein,
> this whole
> > > I surely hope people would not judge
> > > me based on who is following me.
> >
> > They won't unless they are stupid. After all, Twitter
> > gives you no way to control who follows you, and most
> > people understand this.
>
> sure they do. it's called "blocking". every time a pain
> in th
Adam,
I know this is off the topic of the thread, but along the same vein,
this whole notion that someone can spam one via DMs is absolutely
bloody bullshit.
By virtue of how Twitter works, when you follow someone, you grant
that person permission to DM you. They can send you the biggest load
of
Let's not get into a semantic argument of spam.
Spam, noise, trash followers, whatever you want to call them. They are
all annoying and not what Twitter or most users want in their
service.
I'm unsure if a company HAS to pursue every trademark infringement to
hold their trademark. Otherwise you
**sigh** Dewald, on a technicality, you're completely right. We did opt in.
It was originally a convenience to opt int, so you knew you were being
followed. However since the count of bots has increased, it's now an
inconvenience to constantly get follow emails\texts from bots. Perhaps they
could r
> > Perhaps I'm being daft, but how can someone following
> > you be "spam" or "wrong", regardless of whether it is
> > manual or auto follow?
>
> It can be spam if you had your account sent to
> auto-notify your phone or inbox when someone follows you.
You're wrong.
SPAM only exists when you do
sure they do. it's called "blocking". every time a pain in the ass porn bot
or "social media expert" following 100x more people than follow them follows
me, i block them. then they can't follow me.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:51, owkaye wrote:
>
> > I surely hope people would not judge
> > me bas
> I surely hope people would not judge
> me based on who is following me.
They won't unless they are stupid. After all, Twitter gives
you no way to control who follows you, and most people
understand this.
> Followers do no, zero, nada harm.
> Just let them be.
Agreed.
Owkaye
Adam,
It may be an irritation and it may cost you money, but it is NOT spam.
You opted in to receive the notifications on your phone, and hence it
is NOT spam.
Dewald
On Aug 12, 3:46 pm, Adam Cloud wrote:
> It can be spam if you had your account sent to auto-notify your phone or
> inbox when
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Dewald Pretorius wrote:
>
> Perhaps I'm being daft, but how can someone following you be "spam" or
> "wrong", regardless of whether it is manual or auto follow?
>
It can be spam if you had your account sent to auto-notify your phone or
inbox when someone follow
Scott,
Personally I think that is a mutilation of the use and purpose of
Twitter. I surely hope people would not judge me based on who is
following me.
The only way one can maintain a "clean" list of people who follow you
is to block those whom you don't want as followers. It is going to
cause t
On 8/12/09 12:50 PM, Bob Fishel wrote:
As another extreme example: Datamining Myspace (if it's possible I've
never worked with it) for 12 year olds names and addresses etc...
COULD have a purposeful use in advertising but if your $12 product is
being used by 99% of people to find children to att
Others use your following and follower list as a way to bridge new
connections to interesting people.
If I am interested in Person X, I can look at who is following him,
and know that others are probably of like minds. I can dig into their
list of followers and following, and build deepe
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Scott Haneda wrote:
>
> I am not a lawyer, but everything I have read about this makes the below
> impossible. If you have a trademark on a name, you MUST protect it.
> Failure to protect it, results in loss of the mark.
>
> The quote below, clearly states that
I am not a lawyer, but everything I have read about this makes the
below impossible. If you have a trademark on a name, you MUST protect
it. Failure to protect it, results in loss of the mark.
The quote below, clearly states that Twitter is not going to protect
this mark. That being th
I was always under the impression trademarks came down to a reasonable
expectation that users could be confused as to which was the original
name.
In the example of the "Edge" iPhone game, he was called out against
using Edge as a name since there was a shady software development
house th
>
> Apparently you fail to recall the "MikeRoweSoft.com" case.
>
The deal with MikeRoweSoft is a different issue then this one. Mike
Rowe was perfectly fine in his use. However when Microsoft sent him a
C&D and said they would pay $100 (IIRC) for his domain. His mistake
was saying "yah, maybe fo
The second you can play drinking games based on how many times a
company is mentioned on local news; I think that companies ability to
be "clear and unambiguous" becomes as hard as not getting hammered in
5 minutes of watching the news.
--
Scott
Iphone says hello.
On Aug 12, 2009, at 6:0
I don't know how we get to the point of "meaningful" auto following.
That seems hard to define.
If I post a tweet mentioning "photography" I get 5-10 new followers in
a few minutes. Use the word "cock" or "pussy" and the auto follow rate
is higher. Hash tags are vulnerable here as well.
>
> Apparently you fail to recall the "MikeRoweSoft.com" case.
>
The deal with MikeRoweSoft is a different issue then this one. Mike
Rowe was perfectly fine in his use. However when Microsoft sent him a
C&D and said they would pay $
Zac Bowling
Good morning Abraham ;-)
On 12 Aug 2009, at 18:20, Abraham Williams wrote:
Me :(
2009/8/12 Neil Ellis
I pity the fool who wakes up to this thread in the morning :-)
--
Abraham Williams | Community Evangelist | http://web608.org
Hacker | http://abrah.am | http://twitter.com/abraham
Project
Me :(
2009/8/12 Neil Ellis
> I pity the fool who wakes up to this thread in the morning :-)
>
--
Abraham Williams | Community Evangelist | http://web608.org
Hacker | http://abrah.am | http://twitter.com/abraham
Project | http://fireeagle.labs.poseurtech.com
This email is: [ ] blogable [x] as
All this stuff about following being equated to spamming is nonsense.
really, glad you cleared that up ;-)
I guess I would also add and remind people that when a new user creates an
account, the first thing Twitter does is produce a list of a bunch of people
this person may or may not know and ask them if they want to follow them.
Following people you don't know is part of the DNA of Twitter and part of
Dewald
Honest question honest answer
If someone follows me, I'd like to find out about them and see if I'd
like to follow them, I'd like to consider becoming friends with this
person.
How can I do that if 80% of my follows are Real Estate Agents. It
wastes my time, it's annoying an
It may get even harder and open the door to an already hot topic with
T.W.I.T. (The Week In Tech) which is a show by Leo Laporte.
I believe this show pre-dates the use of twit, and nay pre-date
Twitter. I seem to recall at some point Leo Laporte would not even use
Twitter as a result of
Bob,
Perhaps I'm being daft, but how can someone following you be "spam" or
"wrong", regardless of whether it is manual or auto follow?
If you don't follow them, you don't see their tweets, and they cannot
DM you.
In other words, what does it matter if 50,000 undesirable accounts
follow you, ex
Oh come on, you're just being disingenous now. "First they came for
the pedophiles" "First they came for the muderers"
Today's society is to worried about offending someone to acknowledge
the fact that YES there are univseral rights and universal wrongs.
That is not to say that there isn't a diff
I believe that threatening with legal action was the secondary choice
for Twitter.
The first choice would have been simply blackholing the IP address of
Dean's application. However, that's impossible because it's a .Net app
that makes calls from each user's IP address, much like Tweetie and
Tweet
"First they came for the Spammers and I didn’t speak up, because I
wasn’t a Spammer."
Oh really, spammers being banned equated to the Holocuast, perspective
required.
On Aug 12, 10:55 am, Duane Roelands wrote:
Are any of these developers -selling- their products? You are.
Are any of
Has nothing to do with anything.
Enforce your trademark evenly or don't enforce it at all. Selective
enforcement is not allowed.
On Aug 12, 10:57 am, Rich wrote:
> and I'm certain the reason for adding the Twitter name violation in
> there in addition to all the others is that they don't want
I love how in this discussion people keep trying to bring emotion and
personal beliefs into a legal context.
So he made a tool for spammers. What does that have to do with
anything?
"First they came for the Spammers and I didn’t speak up, because I
wasn’t a Spammer."
There are two LEGAL issues
I pity the fool who wakes up to this thread in the morning :-)
Here's a thought, if Twitter has allowed a specific site to have their
application name added to the "posted from" list, is that tacit
permission to use the name? They've been happy to show messages as
posted from Twitteriffic, which uses their name and, it could be
argued, have explicitly allowed
On 8/12/09 10:14 AM, Dean Collins wrote:
So has anyone heard from or know any of the other developers? Did they
also get an email last night?
IANAL, but, I think the horse has already left the barn for Twitter.
Unless someone is building a short-message service called "Twitter" it's
hard to
ednesday, August 12, 2009 10:52 AM
To: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com
Subject: [twitter-dev] Re: FW: Twitter is Suing me!!!
Seriously Dean I'm afraid that your application (like a mass mailer)
is the kind of the thing that spammers use to fill up our followers
list with a bunch of
m] On Behalf Of Neil Ellis
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:52 AM
To: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com
Subject: [twitter-dev] Re: FW: Twitter is Suing me!!!
Seriously Dean I'm afraid that your application (like a mass mailer) is the
kind of the thing that spammers use to fill up
and I'm certain the reason for adding the Twitter name violation in
there in addition to all the others is that they don't want their name
associated with, what is effectively a Web 2.0 spamming operation.
On Aug 12, 3:55 pm, Duane Roelands wrote:
> Are any of these developers -selling- their pr
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 05:17:27 -0700
Dale Merritt wrote:
> What is Twitters real stance on auto following? In there API they
> prohibit "mass following" so what does that mean exactly. More than
> 1, 100? In my app, I had planned on integrating some meaniful auto
> following
I'm sure that some
Are any of these developers -selling- their products? You are.
Are any of these developers violating the Terms of Service? You are.
Just because another website has "Twitter" in the name doesn't make
their situation the same as yours.
You made a tool for spammers. You get caught. Get over it
-dial).
+44-20-3129-6001 (London in-dial).
From: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com [mailto:twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com
] On Behalf Of Jeremy Darling
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:12 AM
To: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com
Subject: [twitter-dev] Re: FW: Twitter
Now, with that kind of clause in a Developer TOS, would it mean
applications will need to actively prevent users from violating
Twitter TOS?
For example, would Tweetie and TweetDeck then be in violation if they
did not prevent users from:
a) Publishing the same tweet text more than once in short
development-t...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Darling
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:12 AM
To: twitter-development-talk@googlegroups.com
Subject: [twitter-dev] Re: FW: Twitter is Suing me!!!
Actually, I recall it perfectly well. MS threatened action against Mike Roe (a
Canadian s
Actually, I recall it perfectly well. MS threatened action against Mike Roe
(a Canadian student as I recall) for his development company. The case was
settled OUT OF COURT, with MS basically having to purchase his domain. The
same could be applied to this product where Twitter can not demand the
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Bill Kocik wrote:
>
>
>
> On Aug 12, 9:07 am, Duane Roelands wrote:
>
>> It doesn't matter who else
>> is doing it.
>
> Well, actually, it does matter. That's the thing about trademarks -
> you are obligated to defend them across the board, or you lose them.
> Yo
On Aug 12, 9:07 am, Duane Roelands wrote:
> It doesn't matter who else
> is doing it.
Well, actually, it does matter. That's the thing about trademarks -
you are obligated to defend them across the board, or you lose them.
You can't selectively defend them by allowing people (or applications,
As I've already said above, quoted from Twitter, they are doing it to
protect their brand but are not interested in stopping people using
Tweet, in fact they are actively encouraging it!
On Aug 12, 1:53 pm, Dale Merritt wrote:
> The trademark app for "Tweet" could be disputed. There is a window
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Dewald Pretorius wrote:
>
> Just thinking, I cannot recall ever having seen in the Twitter TOS
> where it says that it is a violation of their TOS to assist or enable
> others to violate their TOS. It is probably just an oversight, and
> it's something that should
Just thinking, I cannot recall ever having seen in the Twitter TOS
where it says that it is a violation of their TOS to assist or enable
others to violate their TOS. It is probably just an oversight, and
it's something that should be in a Developer TOS.
But, even if they did that, they would be p
The OP should have first gotten a lawyer to look over it, instead of
freaking out hysterically here.
He's not being sued. Twitter does own the name Twitter and can
selectively choose to sue/C&D (or not sue) anyone they like who
infringes on it. You defense being "other people have registered the
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Dewald Pretorius wrote:
>
> Andy,
>
> One would hope that a judge would not even hear a case that said,
> "Defendent violated terms that he had no way of knowing exactly when
> and how he violated those terms."
>
> Suspending accounts based on what is a nebulous co
Andy,
One would hope that a judge would not even hear a case that said,
"Defendent violated terms that he had no way of knowing exactly when
and how he violated those terms."
Suspending accounts based on what is a nebulous concept to the public
is one thing. Even though it may not be good PR, it
>
>
>
> I'm not expressing an opinion on this one way or the other, but what a
> lot of people don't realize about US trademark law is this: Twitter
> doesn't have a choice in this matter. They are *required* to actively
> defend their trademark, or they will lose it. This is how the law
> works, a
On Aug 12, 12:27 am, Jeremy Darling wrote:
> Seems lil twitter grew up and found lawyers. While I don't agree or like
> the product that Dean sells, I dis-agree more with the misuse of legal
> representation by a corporation even more. I remember when MS started this
> everyone threw stones
You're not being sued. That's a cease-and-desist letter.
You're violating Twitter's trademark by selling a product with
"Twitter" in the name. The legal precedents for this are ironclad.
You can't do it.
You're violating Twitters terms of service by offering a program that
auto-follows thousan
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:04 AM, Dewald Pretorius wrote:
>
> Logically, isn't it necessary that a clear and unambiguous definition
> of "aggressive following" to be publicly available before any legal
> action can be based on it?
>
> Just asking.
>
> Dewald
>
The decision in any legal action woul
As has been stated ad nauseum, Twitter would have a very hard time
initiating legal proceedings simply because you violated the TOS. They could
suspend your account, sure, but they're a private company. They could
suspend your account because they didn't like the color of your shirt.
On Wed, Aug 1
Logically, isn't it necessary that a clear and unambiguous definition
of "aggressive following" to be publicly available before any legal
action can be based on it?
Just asking.
Dewald
The trademark app for "Tweet" could be disputed. There is a window of time
in the trademark office proceedings that you can do this. I think its 60
days after the mark has been approved for publication, prior to the official
registration is approved. Any app w/ Tweet in their name might band
toge
FYI - mashable.com just posted a story on this here
http://mashable.com/2009/08/12/twitter-not-suing-developer/
Interesting to know that if Twitter gets the trademark for "Tweet"
also what about the apps and businesses that have been using it before
the claim like TweetDeck etc etc? Seems they wo
What is Twitters real stance on auto following? In there API they prohibit
"mass following" so what does that mean exactly. More than 1, 100? In my
app, I had planned on integrating some meaniful auto following
Dale
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 4:55 AM, Goblin wrote:
>
> The question is, are they g
The question is, are they going to be going after Twitteriffic,
Twitterholic, Twitpic, Twitvid, Twittelator, Twitterena, Twitterfon,
iTwitter etc?
I admit that I was fair game having the blue birds in the backdrop (as
I say, it was a stupid project that got traction and the new version
is live no
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 5:52 AM, Rich wrote:
>
> I'm not aware of this but this link
> http://blog.twitter.com/2009/07/may-tweets-be-with-you.html,
> published only last month says
>
> "We have applied to trademark Tweet because it is clearly attached to
> Twitter from a brand perspective but we
I'm not aware of this but this link
http://blog.twitter.com/2009/07/may-tweets-be-with-you.html,
published only last month says
"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 applicati
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
