Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dear Instagram

blog.bolt.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 132 posts

Re: Dear Instagram

#41

Post by thomasz »

brandonmenc wrote: post #24

> Imagine how it would have felt if Google or Apple or Facebook had launched a photo-sharing app called Instagram in 2011. "Bolt" is a short, common word. "Instagram" is not (it's also more descriptive.) Unfortunately, the days of naming products desirable things like "bolt," and being able to defend them, legally or not, are over. The strange-made-up-word naming trend is annoying, but at least you're guaranteed a na…

I'm pretty sure you can get trademark protection for short, common words, as long as they are not descriptive or common for the protected areas. You can name your car bar and your bar car, but not your bar bar and your car car.

Re: Dear Instagram

#42

Post by resu_nimda »

ivraatiems wrote: post #35
vjvj wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure the public appeal is a better option for a small start up to put pressure Instagram to use a different name rather than a behind the scenes legal notice...

Absolutely! That's exactly my point. And again, I'm not saying that's wrong or bad. I'm saying it's the smart, albeit cynical move.

He's saying that this might reasonably be considered the most effective way to actually persuade Instagram to change (even if it's still a longshot), which kind of goes against your main point of "there's no intention of getting Instagram to actually do anything."

Re: Dear Instagram

#43

Post by eps »

dimillian wrote: post #10

Also, Facebook have a library named bolt: https://developers.facebook.com/blog/post/2014/01/30/let-s-b...

Let's not forget Disney's Bolt while we are at it!

Re: Dear Instagram

#45

Post by ivraatiems »

resu_nimda wrote: post #42
ivraatiems wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely! That's exactly my point. And again, I'm not saying that's wrong or bad. I'm saying it's the smart, albeit cynical move.

He's saying that this might reasonably be considered the most effective way to actually persuade Instagram to change (even if it's still a longshot), which kind of goes against your main point of "there's no intention of getting Instagram to actually do anything."

For sure, it might be, but what I'm saying is that's not the primary intention. It would be nice if it happened, but it's not necessarily going to unless this gets serious traction.

Re: Dear Instagram

#46

Post by 5teev »

coder23 wrote: post #33
dimillian wrote: post #10

Also, Facebook have a library named bolt: https://developers.facebook.com/blog/post/2014/01/30/let-s-b...

That is not in direct competition to Bolt. If Instagram launched a game or a washing service called Bolt, there would be no problem.

"Bolts Framework" is rather different from, and clearly not competing with, "Bolt."

Re: Dear Instagram

#47

Post by grabeh »

thomasz wrote: post #41
brandonmenc wrote: post #24

> Imagine how it would have felt if Google or Apple or Facebook had launched a photo-sharing app called Instagram in 2011. "Bolt" is a short, common word. "Instagram" is not (it's also more descriptive.) Unfortunately, the days of naming products desirable things like "bolt," and being able to defend them, legally or not, are over. The strange-made-up-word naming trend is annoying, but at least you're guaranteed a na…

I'm pretty sure you can get trademark protection for short, common words, as long as they are not descriptive or common for the protected areas. You can name your car bar and your bar car, but not your bar bar and your car car.

I think that part of the issue is that in a competitive marketplace, the risk of a third party either a) objecting to your short common word upon its creation, or b) coming along at a later date and selecting the same or similar mark are much higher than if you create a compound name or a fanciful/unusual combination of words as your mark.

Simply put, if you create a fanciful term you will be able to operate with greater reassurance that you will not face trouble in the future in relation to your choice of name.

Part of the problem here is the imbalance between the parties' respective positions. The article in fact admits that it is not users being confused that Instagram's app is related to their existing app, but the other way round. You might say that due to Instagram's size, they have the ability to instantly develop goodwill around a new app and its name (I am playing devil's advocate here to an extent).

If I was Instagram I would probably offer a small sum to Bolt.co to change their name on the basis that I could offer a sum now or know I have a deep reserve of budget for legal fees to argue that Bolt.co has not developed sufficient goodwill/reputation to be entitled to prevent Instagram's usage of 'Bolt'.

Re: Dear Instagram

#48

Post by baby »

dblacc wrote: post #36
brandonmenc wrote: post #24

> Imagine how it would have felt if Google or Apple or Facebook had launched a photo-sharing app called Instagram in 2011. "Bolt" is a short, common word. "Instagram" is not (it's also more descriptive.) Unfortunately, the days of naming products desirable things like "bolt," and being able to defend them, legally or not, are over. The strange-made-up-word naming trend is annoying, but at least you're guaranteed a na…

>Unfortunately, the days of naming products desirable things like "bolt," and being able to defend them, legally or not, are over. I have a feeling the guys at King disagree with you.

or Apple.

Re: Dear Instagram

#49

Post by brandonmenc »

baby wrote: post #48
dblacc wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Unfortunately, the days of naming products desirable things like "bolt," and being able to defend them, legally or not, are over. I have a feeling the guys at King disagree with you.

or Apple.

Apple's choice of name cost them all sorts of money, re: music.

Re: Dear Instagram

#50

Post by hackerboos »

thomasz wrote: post #41
brandonmenc wrote: post #24

> Imagine how it would have felt if Google or Apple or Facebook had launched a photo-sharing app called Instagram in 2011. "Bolt" is a short, common word. "Instagram" is not (it's also more descriptive.) Unfortunately, the days of naming products desirable things like "bolt," and being able to defend them, legally or not, are over. The strange-made-up-word naming trend is annoying, but at least you're guaranteed a na…

I'm pretty sure you can get trademark protection for short, common words, as long as they are not descriptive or common for the protected areas. You can name your car bar and your bar car, but not your bar bar and your car car.

> I'm pretty sure you can get trademark protection for short, common words, as long as they are not descriptive or common for the protected areas.

Like Apple?

Post reply on HN