← Back to team overview

ubuntu-phone team 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[0].

> Do:
>     Name your website, product, or application with something unique.
> Don't:
>     Use Twitter in the name of your website, application or product.
>     [...]
> Use Tweet in the name of your application if used with any other service.

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.



[0] https://twitter.com/logo

PS: will reading ubuntu-twitter-app and unity-webapp-twitter I saw that both are named "Twitter"