Dear Instagram • Hacker News Board

Re: Dear Instagram

#101

Post by Mc_Big_G » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 4:49 PM UTC

bhandziuk wrote: post #58

Dear Bolt.co, I truly wish you luck in your fight against Instagram. Name stealing is a rough game. I know because I have been traveling on Bolt buses for 8 years now ( http://www.boltbus.com/ ). I know there is some confusion because you have basically the same symbol. Maybe there aren't too many ways to vary a lightning bolt shooting through an "O" in the word "Bolt" but I welcome you (and Instagram to try). Sincer…

Trademarks are classified by "Goods and Services". A bus company is clearly different from a mobile app. A mobile app (Instagram) is clearly the same as a mobile app (Bolt). For the purposes of trademarking, the similarity of a "mobile voice and messaging" app and a "mobile photo sharing" app is not quite as clear. I'm sure some lawyers would be happy to help clear it up.

So, while I get your intention, that's not how trademarks work. If Bolt doesn't have a trademark, they should stop complaining.

Re: Dear Instagram

#102

Post by diminish » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 4:52 PM UTC

bhandziuk wrote: post #73

sheetjs wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you miss the problem here. There is very little confusion between BoltBus and Bolt.co in the sense that they are in completely different industries and the likelihood of confusion is low. As bolt.co is claiming, there are many people who appear to be confused between instagram's offering and the company's product (they are arguably in the same space and possibly competitors).

Yes, I suppose you're right. Though how big would one of these need to be for the other to care? I surely could not name my blanket company Microsoft and get away with it, right?

For more clarity, here's a search on Google Play for Bolt named apps, and their logos. https://play.google.com/store/search?q=bolt&c=apps&hl=en

Re: Dear Instagram

#103

Post by karjaluoto » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 4:54 PM UTC

I wrote about this topic a few months back, when 53 was upset about Facebook using the "name" Paper: http://www.erickarjaluoto.com/blog/the-perils-of-naming-your...

tl;dr Using a word to name a company is easy, but indefensible.

Re: Dear Instagram

#104

Post by huntleydavis » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 4:55 PM UTC

I think this is a risk that bolt.co and really any startup that chooses a short 'techy' word as their company name has to factor in.

Re: Dear Instagram

#105

Post by bhandziuk » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 5:01 PM UTC

grabeh wrote: post #99

bhandziuk wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. So what is Microsoft Combine Harvesters was founded before Microsoft Corporation yes the latter became larger faster? Even though Microsoft Corp is larger they were also later to the game. Can they try to get exclusive rights to Microsoft?

First user issues aren't as relevant in trade marks as in other intellectual property rights. Potentially you could have two companies in discrete markets/territories build up goodwill in an identical name with a dispute only being triggered when some form of encroachment occurs. A good example was the Budweiser v Budvar saga http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budweiser_Budvar_Brewery#Tradem... Generally, you would hope th…

Very interesting, thanks!

Re: Dear Instagram

#106

Post by fred_durst » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 5:03 PM UTC

daddykotex wrote: post #5

I hope they change the name. Since Instagram is owned by Facebook and Facebook has launched Slingshot, a Snapchat rival, I'm wondering why they need another one?

I have a feeling Facebook is becoming a bit of an integrated app holdings company. Where as Amazon and Google have turned their infrastructure to the public, Facebook appears to be using it and its large investment dollars to be building a type of decentralized(partly) tech conglomerate.

It's almost as if they took their lessons from the struggles in becoming a platform for third parties and decided that there are only a small number of core applications people use. Instead of waiting for, and having less control of these high profile apps, Facebook instead is just owning them outright.

Re: Dear Instagram

#107

Post by rm445 » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 5:04 PM UTC

bhandziuk wrote: post #73

sheetjs wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you miss the problem here. There is very little confusion between BoltBus and Bolt.co in the sense that they are in completely different industries and the likelihood of confusion is low. As bolt.co is claiming, there are many people who appear to be confused between instagram's offering and the company's product (they are arguably in the same space and possibly competitors).

Yes, I suppose you're right. Though how big would one of these need to be for the other to care? I surely could not name my blanket company Microsoft and get away with it, right?

Possibly. There's a company near me (I see the liveried van trundling around) trading as Apple Property Maintenance.

(I'm amazed The Beatles let them get away with it).

Re: Dear Instagram

#108

Post by freehunter » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 5:13 PM UTC

grabeh wrote: post #28

freehunter wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately, Bolt browser no longer exists and names, especially four letter common words, can't be reserved forever.

Technically they can. I could register whatever sequence of letters I want provided they can act as a unique identifier for me, and are not in themselves descriptive. If I register 'Bolt' for dog-walking services this is not descriptive and provided I pay my renewal fees I can protect the word forever, and take action against those whose use of it confuses users (for example 'Bolt' for dog food) or takes unfair advan…

>provided I pay my renewal fees

That's my point. There's a maximum lifespan; the life of the company. Since Bolt browser no longer exists, I doubt they would renew the trademark.

Re: Dear Instagram

#109

Post by Pxtl » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 5:13 PM UTC

LeonidasXIV wrote: post #78

micampe wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The strange-made-up-word naming trend is annoying Why? Is it really a “trend”? Chevrolet, Toyota, Lexus, Microsoft, Kodak, Leica, Nikon, Canon, Nokia, Rolex. Some of these are not entirely made up, but they sound like it if you are not familiar with small Japanese towns.

> Toyota Actually, Toyota[1] (豊田) is indeed a Japanese town, not even particularly small and is the home of Toyota Motor Corporation. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota,_Aichi

But it's not. The town is named after the company, not the other way around.

The company, in turn, is named after the Toyoda family that founded it. The spelling was changed for aesthetics and connotation.

So yeah, made-up word.

Re: Dear Instagram

#110

Post by enthdegree » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 5:13 PM UTC

The #1 way to spot a mushy web3.0 social startup is to see if they named their product a generic, overloaded dictionary word. This is a really irritating recent trend. Every time I see one of these I can almost hear the 'profile picture in a circle' of the CEO pitching the name to me:

'its a really utilitarian, no-nonsense product for People Who Just Get It Done, like me & my team, so naming it out of the common English vocabulary was really the most natural expression of this'

Naming your products tired names like 'Bolt' is not bold, it's just uncreative. It helps no one: it's pretentious, it makes your product harder to find (regardless of 'how dissimilar it is to previous products'), and it makes your brand less memorable. Why would anyone want to do this to their company or their customers?

Maybe people who perpetrate this sort of situation will continue to have tensions like this one and the trend will gracefully(?) self-destruct. Hopefully the people who are capable of building valuable products will choose names which don't cost them!