Make no mistake, the trademark is the reason for them to examine how you use the trademark. Its the job of the attorney to find as many counts for law suit, that support their overall complaint. There arguement would be that the way Dean uses his app, dimenishes the value of the Twitter. If he had called it MyFollowButler.com he would not of heard from them, unless the app created "mass" follows.
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 10:50 AM, PJB <pjbmancun...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > The scariest part about all of this, frankly, is less the trademark > stuff, and more the fact that he is being punished for violating > Twitter's terms and services. As near as I can tell, his app just > follows users who tweet certain keywords. It doesn't even UNFOLLOW > them (thus potentially churning), it just follows people. > > Since there are API calls for those actions, many of us have built > rich apps around follow. Indeed, Twitter DOES support mass > following... if not, why would batch following be in their roadmap > (http://apiwiki.twitter.com/V2-Roadmap#Following )... To now see > another app taken down because of supposed API violations around mass > following is very scary. > > And what's even MORE scary is the selectivity of it. Why was this > little guy taken down? What about, say, the popular downloadable XYZ > app which apparently does what tweetbutler does and then some? Do > they have some more formal relationship with Twitter? Or do their > other apps somehow inculcate them against violating TS? > > It's a minefield out there, and that's VERY VERY scary. Who knows if > the API calls you make today might violate terms and services > tomorrow? Perhaps you can count your lucky stars if you have casual > email correspondence with a Twitter engineer... maybe that's what's > needed to fend off trouble? And too bad for those guys over in > England, like this guy, who perhaps didn't have such a relationship! > > -- Dale Merritt Fol.la MeDia, LLC