

Makers of Paper App Ask Facebook to Change Its New App Name - uptown
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/03/makers-of-paper-app-ask-facebook-to-change-new-app-name/

======
josefresco
As much as I want to sympathize with the "original" Paper app creators, the
name they chose is incredibly generic, common and they _must_ have considered
this possibility when naming their product. Not only that, Paper invokes
almost no meaning by itself and Facebook's use of it almost seems more
appropriate.

it certainly sucks when an 800 lbs gorilla moves into your space, but let's
not break out the pitchforks until we've considered all sides of this
argument.

Having recently met with the dreaded lawyers regarding product naming for a
side project of mine, they were clear to advise against using generic terms in
the product name.

~~~
almosnow
Im with you man. On their public statement they rant about how FB is somehow
ruining the "heritage" associated to the word "paper" that they'd built.
Yeah... "paper"

"We think Facebook can apply the same degree of thought they put into the app
into building a brand name of their own. An app about stories shouldn’t start
with someone else’s story. Facebook should stop using our brand name." \-
That's just delusional.

~~~
xauronx
To be fair, that's kind of what ownership is about. Being first the stick your
flag in some common thing and claim it as your own. Like "Salesforce" is a
common term, but go ahead and try to make a company/product named that. In the
Apple App Store realm, there's really one app named Paper and they probably
spend a few bucks (/s) trying to make it a well known name.

~~~
josefresco
Onwership requires more than "sticking your flag" in something. You need to
also execute and build a product, service or entity around that flag otherwise
you can't even begin to enforce any "ownership". If you start with a generic
name like Paper, it's even harder to enforce.

------
lancewiggs
Sure the Paper folks were perhaps ill-advised (or not advised by anyone) on
their generic choice of name.

But it's also clear that Facebook knew about the existing product and chose to
go ahead regardless. They are behaving like the bully here and it's an
arrogant thoughtless move.

Do we think that Facebook would do nothing if 1000 new apps of the same name
(Paper) were launched?

~~~
lloyddobbler
Nope. Especially given their trademark lawsuits towards any company with
'book' in the title.

[http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101025/05120911576/facebo...](http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101025/05120911576/facebook-
sues-faceporn-apparently-believing-it-owns-the-words-face-book.shtml)

------
lloyddobbler
Agreed with most of the commenters re: the generic name.

However, if Facebook hadn't continually threatened companies who use the word
'book' in their names with trademark lawsuits, I'd be a lot more sympathetic
to them. As it is, I support FiftyThree on this one.

