41–50 of 135 posts
We may not have the full story here, but it doesn't seem like Instagram is disputing that they simply took it. I don't see anyone suggesting that they even attempted to contact the guy first. Outrageously poor way to handle things. Also, at what point does an Instagram account become "inactive"?
When rich and famous people want your handle.
Well, it feels weird to defend Instagram, but here we go. The important lines from the article are these ones: > Instagram confirmed to Newsbeat that Kevin's handle had been changed in line with its policy. > It allows it to make changes to an account if it's been inactive for a certain amount of time. I tried going to the guy's new Instagram [1], but couldn't see any posts there at all. I visited his Twitter [2] ins…
Well, it feels weird to defend Instagram, but here we go. The important lines from the article are these ones: > Instagram confirmed to Newsbeat that Kevin's handle had been changed in line with its policy. > It allows it to make changes to an account if it's been inactive for a certain amount of time. I tried going to the guy's new Instagram [1], but couldn't see any posts there at all. I visited his Twitter [2] ins…
Ahh yes, nothing more lively and current than watching senior citizens coo over monarchs.
In all seriousness, this is just another step towards instagram being another bland reflection of the media fun house in which we all live: famous people get air time to pimp products and movements.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have to agree that it's the better option. Certainly not a 100% fail-safe solution – I see people already listing domains that were seized for various inexcusable reasons – but the Nissan.com case [0] (Nissan the car company vs. Mr. Nissan the run-of-the-mill computer sales guy) comes to mind as a classic (and fascinating) counterexample. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Motors_vs._Nissan_Compu...
Madonna Ciccone famously thefted the Madonna.com domain away from Dan Parisi on the ridiculous basis that she somehow magically had a deserving claim on the domain due to her trademark of "Madonna" related to "entertainment services and related goods." https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d200...
...but I am often told I'm too optimistic.
We may not have the full story here, but it doesn't seem like Instagram is disputing that they simply took it. I don't see anyone suggesting that they even attempted to contact the guy first. Outrageously poor way to handle things. Also, at what point does an Instagram account become "inactive"?
And what were they going to tell the guy? It's not like they were going to give him a choice, or offer him restitution. Not doing something like this leads to stupid stuff like having POTUS' handle be "real donald trump" (yes, I know choosing that handle predates his being POTUS, but you get the idea).
I actually find this a charming reminder of the old days of the web. there's a certain populist quality to the idea that no one is important enough to snatch a particular username that some commoner took first. I agree situations like @realdonaldtrump are kind of silly, but it doesn't hurt anyone. anyone who actually has a large audience has a verified account so there's little doubt regarding who actually controls it.
that said, we really do need a responsible way to reclaim truly inactive accounts without enabling "reset my password via email" type attacks.
Well, it feels weird to defend Instagram, but here we go. The important lines from the article are these ones: > Instagram confirmed to Newsbeat that Kevin's handle had been changed in line with its policy. > It allows it to make changes to an account if it's been inactive for a certain amount of time. I tried going to the guy's new Instagram [1], but couldn't see any posts there at all. I visited his Twitter [2] ins…
> encourage a more lively and current community Ahh yes, nothing more lively and current than watching senior citizens coo over monarchs. In all seriousness, this is just another step towards instagram being another bland reflection of the media fun house in which we all live: famous people get air time to pimp products and movements.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who would the "rightful owner" of @apple be? Maybe the one who registered it in the first place? Or does that old instinct of defering to power make you want to give in to the presumptuous request of a large entity?
The word apple has other meanings besides Apple, Inc, but it is a registered trademark in the USA. Since instagram is based in the USA, it's pretty clear that Apple, Inc is the rightful owner . Whether or not they should have a trademark on such a common word is a separate question.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who would the "rightful owner" of @apple be? Maybe the one who registered it in the first place? Or does that old instinct of defering to power make you want to give in to the presumptuous request of a large entity?
The word apple has other meanings besides Apple, Inc, but it is a registered trademark in the USA. Since instagram is based in the USA, it's pretty clear that Apple, Inc is the rightful owner . Whether or not they should have a trademark on such a common word is a separate question.
Well, it feels weird to defend Instagram, but here we go. The important lines from the article are these ones: > Instagram confirmed to Newsbeat that Kevin's handle had been changed in line with its policy. > It allows it to make changes to an account if it's been inactive for a certain amount of time. I tried going to the guy's new Instagram [1], but couldn't see any posts there at all. I visited his Twitter [2] ins…
> encourage a more lively and current community Ahh yes, nothing more lively and current than watching senior citizens coo over monarchs. In all seriousness, this is just another step towards instagram being another bland reflection of the media fun house in which we all live: famous people get air time to pimp products and movements.
???
Instagram is a mainstream everything-is-an-ad site and has been since I've first heard of it.