

Paper, by MiSoft - rbritton
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2014/02/04/paper-paper-paper

======
Gorbzel
It's almost as if there needs to be an entire regulatory scheme for dealing
with naming disputes, which would allow app developers and startups to protect
their brand.

Oh wait, there is, it's called Trademark Law! As such, it's getting really old
seeing a bunch of angry parties writing open letters and rants on social media
trying to claim they're the morally superior party for [BS REASON HERE]. None
of that matters. What matters are statutorily defined factors such as
likelihood of confusion, levels of distinctiveness, date of first use in
commerce, etc that set forth who gets to use a mark as a matter of law.

As such, it really doesn't matter what these MiSoft people tried to do in
iTunes Connect, as Apple is/should not be the gatekeeper when it comes to
naming disputes (see the handful of stories posted by app devs who are mad
about takedowns). Nor does it matter if FiftyThree is particularly pouty that
Facebook came in and tried to use their brand, because their original mark
application really only has to do with stylus based drawing apps.

tl;dr: Nothing to see here until the parties in question actually lawyer up
and assert infringement.

~~~
Tloewald
Frsnkly, I'm sick of companies -- software companies in particular -- trying
to own plain English words. I was sick of it when Microsoft registered
"Windows" as a trademark (they actually had the trademark challenged and lost
it in Australia -- as a common use term in computing), and "Word" and "Excel"
and "Access" and "Money" and on and on. If Microsoft wants to sell "Microsoft
Word" then good luck, but I should be able to sell "BillyBob Word" or
whatever. (Yes, I guess this means I kind of don't like "Apple" as a
registered trademark either. I have no problem with the Apple logo (now
they've bought it from the Beatles) or "Apple Inc." or "Apple Computer".)

Imagine if Boeing owned the trademark "Airplane" or if Southwest owned
"Ticket" (but only in the domain of air travel...). People would think that
was ridiculous.

MiSoft is angry because they tried to squat on the name "paper" and failed and
now "paper" is "owned" by someone else. The sensible option is to allow anyone
to call their app "paper" (but underneath it's com.foo.paper or com.bar.paper)
and users will be annoyed if your name or icon are utterly indistinct. OTOH if
you somehow actually own the name Papr or whatever then good luck to you.

Incidentally, "Paper" by 53 is _the_ most annoying iPad application I use. It
works well -- I like it a lot -- but its tools are all in-app purchases, and
if you accidentally touch a tool you don't own (because they're all there,
dimmed out) you get an ad for the tool. After I first got the app I decided I
liked it enough to pay for "all" the tools. Then they added a new (expensive)
tool I didn't want. So I have this annoying tool I can't remove and don't want
to pay for out of principle, but every time I touch it, the frickin' ad
appears.

------
Mithaldu
I honestly have to say that i find myself highly amused by people appropiating
the names of everyday objects for their products, exhibiting no common sense
or creativity, and then getting upset in true kindergarten style when others
do the same thing.

~~~
chaz
> exhibiting no common sense or creativity

I think it makes perfect sense to name products with words that exist (like
"Sprite", "Mustang", and "Tide"), or a compound word made up of 2+ words.
Making up new words ("Pepsi", "Camaro", and "Clorox") can be a lot more risky,
especially if it's a consumer brand.

What would you have named Facebook Paper instead?

~~~
Mithaldu
I don't even know what Facebook Paper is and don't care. However as you
mentioned, compounds, even of the simplest kind, are a GREAT idea. The
important thing is that, even if you lack the common sense or creativity, it
is completely and fully unreasonable to not expect someone else to make the
same bad decision. Open letters, heartfelt emotional addresses and displays of
surprise are not a thing that should happen and instead, if one feels the need
to go ahead and use one of the top 300 english words, one should be fully
prepared for legal battles ahead.

In short: Hire a gaggle of lawyers before using any of these verbatim:
[http://simple.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Most_frequent_1...](http://simple.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Most_frequent_1000_words_in_English)

~~~
chaz
Compound words can cause the same consumer confusion, which is why I don't see
it as any different from one word. You'll definitely get a call from corporate
counsel if you launch a truck called the F-151, a burger named the Huge Mac,
or an energy drink named Blue Bull. Naming things is hard.

~~~
Mithaldu
You're confusing things here, this is about the reaction to someone else
introducing a product named the same, or similar to your own badly named
product. You're describing the situation where one is the person who does the
introduction of the second product. Related, but different things.

------
smm2000
More to this story [http://figure53.com/notes/2014-02-04-david-and-
goliath/](http://figure53.com/notes/2014-02-04-david-and-goliath/)

53 looks more and more like a jerk here

~~~
DannyBee
So, they make a claim i'm having trouble substantiating (but may or may not be
true, of course :P).

They state the PTO has a problem with fiftythree's mark, but actually, the PTO
approved it for publication (yes, after some discussion). It was published for
opposition (IE the PTO approved it) A request for extension of time to oppose
has been filed.

But it hasn't been "refused", or else it would not have issued to the stage it
did.

I can see some correspondence going back and forth with the USPTO, which i
imagine related to figure53 in some way, but hard to say.

Despite claims otherwise, the _goods /services_ this mark applies to is still
the same on the approved mark:

"Computer hardware design; computer software design for use in graphics,
namely, software for use in writing on smart phones and tablets with either a
stylus or a finger; technical support services, namely, troubleshooting of
computer software problems; updating and maintenance of computer software"

and "Computer graphics software for mobile applications, namely, software for
use in writing on smart phones and tablets with either a stylus or a finger"

SO i have trouble with the "USPTO thought it was confusing and refused it".
From what i can see,t hat did _not_ happen.

Also note as of right now, _nobody_ owns a trademark on "paper", though
FiftyThree applied for a mark on 1/28/2014, citing use back to 2012.

~~~
Steko
Figure53's claim is that FiftyThree's original application was not

"Computer hardware design; computer software design for use in graphics,
namely, software for use in writing on smart phones and tablets with either a
stylus or a finger; technical support services, namely, troubleshooting of
computer software problems; updating and maintenance of computer software"

But in fact:

"Computer graphics software; computer hardware and computer programs for the
integration of text, audio, graphics, still images and moving pictures into an
interactive delivery for multimedia applications; computer software to enhance
the audio-visual capabilities of multimedia applications, namely, for the
integration of text, audio, graphics, still images, and moving pictures."

~~~
seandougall
Edit: Removing my original comment because I was reading the PTO's site
backwards. Note that document #1 is the most recent while #20 is the first
chronologically.

The "technical support services" part is also problematic, because it's so
general in scope as to cover all software companies that support their
products (as Figure 53 does).

------
Aaronn
FiftyThree just posted this on Twitter:

.@daringfireball please don’t take the bait. Paper by miSoft V1 was launched
Sep 20th 2012, 5 month after us.

[https://twitter.com/FiftyThree/status/430845528805756928](https://twitter.com/FiftyThree/status/430845528805756928)

~~~
k-mcgrady
Wasn't their point that they registered the name Paper with Apple before
anyone else? You can register an app name and have it held for a couple months
I think before actually launching.

~~~
bennyg
You have 180 days after registering the name to use it - and then you can
never register that name again under that developer account.

~~~
rbritton
There's a loophole. If you register it, submit a binary, and then reject the
binary you get unlimited time.

~~~
bennyg
That's actually awesome to know. I've lost an amazing name because of this -
and wish I still had it.

------
norswap
tl;dr iOS Developer whining because he thought he could lay a special claim on
a dictionary name ( _). Serves him well.

(_) Yes I know you brands do this all the time. It's bullshit.

~~~
97s
There are so many companies that do this its outrageous. Target, Apple, and on
and on. I don't even comprehend how they can even think they can own the word
Paper in an app market.

------
drawkbox
Names should not be distinct like on Google Play and let the best 'Paper' win.
There is no reason why app naming needs to be unique like domains only the id
and bundle. Unique names are always better but noone should be stopped from
using the same name unless it is launched first and there is a trademark etc.

~~~
bdcravens
Hold on, let me rename my racing game "IceOne Racer" :-)

~~~
drawkbox
Hehe, may the best one win, the race is on!

Once someone is out in the market then that is pretty lame but the name
squatting on iOS/iTunes sucks. You have 90-120 days to use a name but if you
upload a binary/app build you can keep it for a long time. Games people play.
If everyone was allowed to use the same names and the first out out gets it or
has a trademark then we are back to fair. Google Play solves this by again
letting the free market decide the best, allowing names to compete. Remember
the two Tetris games on the 8-bit NES?

------
rubiquity
Imagine how angry Dunder Mifflin must be. When do we get to hear their
version: "Paper, from Dunder Mifflin"

------
natrius
Paper is a generic term when it comes to publishing. If you want trademark
protection, there are laws for that, and they don't apply to these guys.

------
bane
So...if I name my app after an extraordinarily common item, I shouldn't expect
somebody else to perhaps do the same?

What's the point here? Why should I care if more than one developer
uncreatively names their apps after the same commonplace thing?

I hope daringfireball posts are on the list of things that drop off the front
page quickly.

~~~
Steko
The point is that the guy complaining about someone much bigger trampling on
his app's good name actually did more or less the same thing to someone else.

------
founder4fun
For many years I successfully defended our trademark in the app store(google
play too), was even called a trademark troll. But hey we have owned said
trademark for the past five years and if you don't defend it it's worthless.
If you do defend it faithfully it could possibly be worth something you can
sell.

Well that was my theory until one of the biggest celebrities on earth created
a semi similar app and used our trademark. We tried to defend it but they
didn't have any respect for our work and started to lawyer up. We had to back
down!

------
forrestthewoods
Can you file, receive, and enforce a trademark on the app store? Presumably
Apple respects that? It's a messy situation and resolving it at the trademark
level seems like a fair and reasonable solution.

------
thiagoperes
My tip is to be more creative and figure out a decent name for your product.
“Browse your Paper with simple, natural movements.” Does this product name
makes sense for native english speaking people?

------
shanselman
Word, Apple, Windows, Pages, Paper, Reader, Brackets.

Noun.

------
throwaway420
I defended FiftyThree really hard in the other thread on this topic but I
guess I have to eat crow because they really come across as jerks by doing
this to another smaller company and now what looks like initiating the start
of legal proceedings on this very issue.

~~~
julianwa
Disclaimer: Co-founder of FiftyThree

Please see my response here:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7181910](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7181910)

------
jrs99
I wonder if it's just awesome publicity to complain about it.

~~~
bdcravens
I'd never have given it a first look otherwise.

------
incision
I'm having a really hard time understanding the sense of entitlement and
indignation carried in these name gripes.

Personally, I tend to think of names as a fraction of what makes up an idea
multiplier [0].

0: [http://sivers.org/multiply](http://sivers.org/multiply)

~~~
lfuller
We're discussing fully implemented businesses and products here, not pre-code
proto startups.

------
billiam
tl;dr Silos suck. Inevitably the farmers that control them them make people
angry. Money talks. Capricious decisions are made. Today's winners become
tomorrow's losers.

------
gbhn
"Apple"

~~~
seandougall
"Windows"

It all depends on the scope you're trying to claim.

------
almosnow
From their open letter: "There’s a simple fix here. We think Facebook can
apply the same degree of thought they put into the app into building a brand
name of their own."

