Not when point 5 of the API TOS is the request you use one of the
twitter logos.....



1.      Please give us a nod in your app, perhaps by including one of
these stylish "Powered by Twitter" badges: 




I somehow get the feeling the legal department haven't read the wiki.


Dean Collins



-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf Of Goblin
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 10:39 AM
To: Twitter Development Talk
Subject: [twitter-dev] Re: Cease & Desist from Twitter



I would assume the logo download is for use in press articles.


On Aug 14, 3:31 pm, Vision Jinx <> wrote:

> Thanks for this post! I am wondering when Twitter trademarked "Twit",

> Blue and Birds?


> Maybe Twitter should be considered an offensive word when making apps

> and use Twi***r instead? Makes me really question making apps using

> this service. :(


> Additionally, I also don't get the dual stance on things, why it's OK

> for some and not others?


> Maybe people/companies who are using "Tweet" in their apps prior to

> Twi***rs claim to the name should challenge it and do the same back?

> (If they want to keep the name) If Twi***r trademarks it then then

> encourage ppl to use it anyways, then why bother trademarking it in

> the first place, unless they plan on being selective or whatever (or

> being able to change their mind later or charge licensing fees for its

> use). Just a thought.


> The other thing that comes to mind is from what I am able to gather

> (maybe I'm wrong here) Twi***r is a privately funded company (http://

> and does not have the ad revenue or a hefty/

> unlimited source of income ("we spend more money than we make.") like

> say Google does so if people challenge these law suites and go the

> distance how long is Twit***s funders going to want to donate their $$

> $ to pay for these legal battles? If I was investing in the company I

> would want my dollars going somewhere productive not to launch legal

> battles with half the internet.


> Also (last thought here), why do they allow people to download and use

> their logo then? What am I missing here? >> "Download our


> I'm just confused by most this :(


> Thank you for your time dev community! :)


> On Aug 13, 4:32 pm, Twitlonger <> wrote:




> > I recently got a letter by email from a UK law firm representing

> > Twitter claiming that my websitewww.twitlonger.comwasinfringing 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

> > 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

> > the third party community. Of course, all these applications have

> > granted access to be listed in the posted from field in the tweets,

> > been granted special access to the API via whitelisting which

> > the application to be named and described and, in many cases, been

> > registered with OAuth, again requiring the name and description of

> > 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

> > (the..Website..).Twitter

> > has no objection to the service which you are offering on the

> > 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

> > is based on the TWITTER

> > trade mark is inherently likely to confuse users of the

> > 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

> > 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 thewww.twitter.comwebsite. 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

> > 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

> > website; and (ii) a blue background.



Reply via email to