3 ms·

What do you mean by "no intention of getting Instagram to actually do anything"? It seems like a pretty clear-cut public appeal to Instagram/Facebook to actual

by sbarre 12y ago

What do you mean by "no intention of getting Instagram to actually do anything"? It seems like a pretty clear-cut public appeal to Instagram/Facebook to actually do something, which is to choose a different name before the product launches.. One has to hope/assume that Bolt has already tried private channels and met with little or no success, which is what forced them to go this public route.. Or are you implying they want to be paid off?

rglullis 12y ago
Your parent is implying they are taking this as an opportunity to get some publicity out of a David-Goliath story.
benihana 12y ago
>What do you mean by "no intention of getting Instagram to actually do anything"? GP means with this blog post Bolt is using this opportunity not to appeal to Istangram, but to get free publicity for the company.
- aaronem 12y ago
  Or possibly, as is actually mentioned in the article under discussion, to lay groundwork for a later legal defense of their mark.
  - jebus989 12y ago
    I don't buy that this three-guy operation has the means for such litigation and this post gives no indication they've had any consultation with a relevant legal professional thus far.
    - aaronem 12y ago
      Well, what of it? They're worried Instagram is going to eat their mark bones and all; whether they're planning to litigate or otherwise, their best defense is to make as much noise about it as they can.
ivraatiems 12y ago
I'll explicate a little more. Obviously, I'm not Bolt and can't know what their thought process was. If it were me, though, here's what I'd do: I'd be angry that they're probably stealing my app's name, enough to write something like this with genuine feeling behind it. I mean, it sucks. But I'd also realize that (1) they're a big company with no prevailing need to listen to me, (2) any attempt on my part to force them to give up the name would result in lengthy, unpleasant legal proceedings I might very well lose, and (3) without some upset customers, they have zero incentive to do anything but throw lawyers at me till I go away. So I would take my appeal, which I wrote back at the beginning, and instead of sending it through private channels, I'd post it online. This way, I win (or at least suffer less) no matter what happens. My app gets free publicity (and sympathy), users might feel like they need to pressure Facebook/Instagram to not let this happen, and even if neither of those occur, my company looks like a good and reasonable company. I believe that if they had tried back-channels and failed, they would have said so in the letter (probably not with details, but with some sort of mention). I don't think they want to be "paid off" per se (i. e., settle for a large sum of money), but I think they want to reap some benefit from this circumstance mostly out of their control, and I don't blame them.

by sbarre 12y ago

rglullis 12y ago

Your parent is implying they are taking this as an opportunity to get some publicity out of a David-Goliath story.

benihana 12y ago

>What do you mean by "no intention of getting Instagram to actually do anything"? GP means with this blog post Bolt is using this opportunity not to appeal to Istangram, but to get free publicity for the company.

aaronem 12y ago
Or possibly, as is actually mentioned in the article under discussion, to lay groundwork for a later legal defense of their mark.
- jebus989 12y ago
  I don't buy that this three-guy operation has the means for such litigation and this post gives no indication they've had any consultation with a relevant legal professional thus far.
  - aaronem 12y ago
    Well, what of it? They're worried Instagram is going to eat their mark bones and all; whether they're planning to litigate or otherwise, their best defense is to make as much noise about it as they can.

ivraatiems 12y ago

I'll explicate a little more. Obviously, I'm not Bolt and can't know what their thought process was. If it were me, though, here's what I'd do: I'd be angry that they're probably stealing my app's name, enough to write something like this with genuine feeling behind it. I mean, it sucks. But I'd also realize that (1) they're a big company with no prevailing need to listen to me, (2) any attempt on my part to force them to give up the name would result in lengthy, unpleasant legal proceedings I might very well lose, and (3) without some upset customers, they have zero incentive to do anything but throw lawyers at me till I go away. So I would take my appeal, which I wrote back at the beginning, and instead of sending it through private channels, I'd post it online. This way, I win (or at least suffer less) no matter what happens. My app gets free publicity (and sympathy), users might feel like they need to pressure Facebook/Instagram to not let this happen, and even if neither of those occur, my company looks like a good and reasonable company. I believe that if they had tried back-channels and failed, they would have said so in the letter (probably not with details, but with some sort of mention). I don't think they want to be "paid off" per se (i. e., settle for a large sum of money), but I think they want to reap some benefit from this circumstance mostly out of their control, and I don't blame them.