My guess is that Twitter will hold both Tweet and Twitter as IP, but
allow general use of Tweet. It seems to really make sense to defend
the name of their company always, and Tweet only when it is misused.
On Aug 12, 11:43 am, Dewald Pretorius <dpr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> TweetLater.com has been using tweet as a verb since April 2008.
> On Aug 12, 12:21 pm, Nick Arnett <nick.arn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In case anybody wants some decent facts on this issue, Wikipedia has a
> > pretty good article.
> > I'm not a lawyer, but I published a book on IP for developers a number of
> > years ago and learned a lot in the process.
> > In the end, it is extraordinarily unlikely that anybody could possibly fail
> > to infringe when using "Twitter" and/or their logo in a product or service
> > name that is based on Twitter. That inevitably could cause confusion about
> > whether or not it is from the company Twitter or not.
> > Infringement has nothing to do with whether or not the infringement is
> > connected with a "good" or "bad" use, such as spamming, etc.
> > It will be interesting to see what they do with "tweet." Many attorneys
> > advise that if you want to preserve rights in a mark, you have to use it
> > only as a proper adjective. Are they going to grant everybody permission to
> > use "tweet" but only that way? I'll send you a Tweet(tm) message? Seems
> > unlikely. Tweet has become a noun and a verb, which I suspect means it is
> > fated to become genericized, if it hasn't already.
> > Nick