ubuntu-phone team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: Addressing the lack of Trademark License for YouTube, Twitter and Facebook Core Apps
I exercise on the Twitter example.
Regarding the name of an app, the terms of twitter are clear.
> Name your website, product, or application with something unique.
> Use Twitter in the name of your website, application or product.
> Use Tweet in the name of your application if used with any other
I think unity-webapp-twitter isn't technically an app but more like an
adapter to integrate with Unity Webapp stuff and I hope and strongly
believe that this is accepted and okay. If this needs discussion, I
think we should do this separately.
ubuntu-twitter-app is what I want to talk about.
That the app name is against the terms of Twitter we accept as a fact.
Two solutions come to my mind.
0. We could name it something which globs "*Tweet*". But it would
restrict it to use Twitter only. (opinion: "Go directly to jail. Do not
pass go, do not collect $200.")
1. We could stick with Gwibber, put nice keywords into the *.desktop
file like "Twitter", "Tweet" and "Identi.ca" and pray to Unity
Application lens that the user experience will be fine. And even the
*.desktop Name need not be "Gwibber Social Client" but could be just
"Social App" or stuff.
I would personally only accept solution one, not zero, if I need to
choose between both.
My opinion also is that I disgusted from the beginning the use of
"Twitter" and "Facebook" in the names of the core apps. I understand the
focus on these services caused by superior user reach. But I am sad
about the lack of choice of services in the design of the core apps. My
estimation is that putting choice into the (now called)
ubuntu-twitter-app for Status.net services is a low hanging fruit.
PS: will reading ubuntu-twitter-app and unity-webapp-twitter I saw that
both are named "Twitter"