16 ms·

Twitter to acquire TwitPic

38 points by jflowers45 12y ago

minimaxir 12y ago
To recap: a) TwitPic got into a trademark dispute with Twitter and decided to shut down instead of fighting it. (http://techcrunch.com/2014/09/04/twitpic-to-shut-down-on-september-25th-following-legal-demands-from-twitter/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/09/04/twitpic-to-shut-down-on-sep...) b) TwitPic says "just kidding," as they found an acquirer. (http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/18/6445597/twitpic-says-it-wont-be-shutting-down-after-all http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/18/6445597/twitpic-says-it-wo...) c) TwitPic says "just kidding on the just kidding," as the talks fell through and they are actually shutting down. (http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/16/twitpic-couldnt-find-an-acquirer-will-shut-down-after-all-on-oct-25th/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/16/twitpic-couldnt-find-an-acq...) d) TwitPic says "just kidding on the just kidding" again, as they are acquired after all. It's impossible to take startups seriously sometimes.
- cdr 12y ago
  At least according to past comment threads, "TwitPic" is literally one single person. Though I suppose failed "startups" being just one or two people behind a name might not be uncommon.
birken 12y ago
I like how the news story says "acquired", but the actual blog post (http://blog.twitpic.com/2014/10/twitpics-future/ http://blog.twitpic.com/2014/10/twitpics-future/) doesn't use that word and says that Twitpic is essentially just giving the domain and existing data to twitter. Generally "acquired" means a) they pay a lot of money for the company and b) some or all of the employees of that company work at the new place. I'm guessing in this case neither of those are true. Granted on the scale of "sensationalist headlines" this isn't worth losing sleep over, but it's funny that the tech press can't help itself in covering stories like this.
brianbreslin 12y ago
I am curious what twitpic gets out of this financially? Twitter has incentive to not have millions of tweets include broken images (I presume). Must have been a hundred K to cover the old server bills etc. /speculation
TimWolla 12y ago
What a back and forth, I wonder how long it takes until Twitter finally shuts it down.
- leviathan 12y ago
  I wonder if Twitter did this just it shut them up.
jszymborski 12y ago
What I'm getting from this is that TwitPic was just holding the pictures hostage until it got the ransom it decided it deserved.
- Dystopian 12y ago
  Pretty much, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Twitter kneecapped TwitPic with a trademark lawsuit - which was already a single-founder company, in a lot of pain after they encouraged use of his platform for years and created their own internal alternative. The only asset he had left was the IP on the servers as a bargaining point. "Twitter, you're gonna have a crapload of 404s on your service unless you give us some kind of safe-landing". You can see why at that time he wouldn't want archive.org backing up the entire archive, allowing Twitter to then batch change the permalinks. Yes, it's user generated content - but IP is a main value add which contributes to why companies are valued so highly. This is a prime example of someone leveraging that properly. We can be mad about it, it's not pretty, but it's business.
yuhong 12y ago
Why did this take so long to announce?

38 points by jflowers45 12y ago

To recap: a) TwitPic got into a trademark dispute with Twitter and decided to shut down instead of fighting it. (http://techcrunch.com/2014/09/04/twitpic-to-shut-down-on-september-25th-following-legal-demands-from-twitter/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/09/04/twitpic-to-shut-down-on-sep...) b) TwitPic says "just kidding," as they found an acquirer. (http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/18/6445597/twitpic-says-it-wont-be-shutting-down-after-all http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/18/6445597/twitpic-says-it-wo...) c) TwitPic says "just kidding on the just kidding," as the talks fell through and they are actually shutting down. (http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/16/twitpic-couldnt-find-an-acquirer-will-shut-down-after-all-on-oct-25th/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/16/twitpic-couldnt-find-an-acq...) d) TwitPic says "just kidding on the just kidding" again, as they are acquired after all. It's impossible to take startups seriously sometimes.

cdr 12y ago
At least according to past comment threads, "TwitPic" is literally one single person. Though I suppose failed "startups" being just one or two people behind a name might not be uncommon.

birken 12y ago

I like how the news story says "acquired", but the actual blog post (http://blog.twitpic.com/2014/10/twitpics-future/ http://blog.twitpic.com/2014/10/twitpics-future/) doesn't use that word and says that Twitpic is essentially just giving the domain and existing data to twitter. Generally "acquired" means a) they pay a lot of money for the company and b) some or all of the employees of that company work at the new place. I'm guessing in this case neither of those are true. Granted on the scale of "sensationalist headlines" this isn't worth losing sleep over, but it's funny that the tech press can't help itself in covering stories like this.

brianbreslin 12y ago

I am curious what twitpic gets out of this financially? Twitter has incentive to not have millions of tweets include broken images (I presume). Must have been a hundred K to cover the old server bills etc. /speculation

TimWolla 12y ago

What a back and forth, I wonder how long it takes until Twitter finally shuts it down.

leviathan 12y ago
I wonder if Twitter did this just it shut them up.

jszymborski 12y ago

What I'm getting from this is that TwitPic was just holding the pictures hostage until it got the ransom it decided it deserved.

Dystopian 12y ago
Pretty much, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Twitter kneecapped TwitPic with a trademark lawsuit - which was already a single-founder company, in a lot of pain after they encouraged use of his platform for years and created their own internal alternative. The only asset he had left was the IP on the servers as a bargaining point. "Twitter, you're gonna have a crapload of 404s on your service unless you give us some kind of safe-landing". You can see why at that time he wouldn't want archive.org backing up the entire archive, allowing Twitter to then batch change the permalinks. Yes, it's user generated content - but IP is a main value add which contributes to why companies are valued so highly. This is a prime example of someone leveraging that properly. We can be mad about it, it's not pretty, but it's business.

yuhong 12y ago

Why did this take so long to announce?