4 ms·

It might've been better to do what "Reddit News" did when it turned into "Relay for Reddit" [1]. So it shouldn't be "Whatsapp" for something. But "Something" f

It might've been better to do what "Reddit News" did when it turned into "Relay for Reddit" [1]. So it shouldn't be "Whatsapp" for something. But "Something" for Whatsapp. I'm not entirely sure if that avoids all the legal issues or whether it was just something Reddit itself was willing to compromise on in the case of "Relay for Reddit", but at least you should start with that kind of default rather than shamelessly using other company's product name as if it was your own. I think others who have used Google's name or other product names in their own Chrome extensions have taken a similar path. Like how "Gmail Checker Plus" (or something) became "Checker Plus For Gmail" [2]. [1] - https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=free.reddit.news https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=free.reddit.ne... [2] - http://jasonsavard.com/checkerPlusForGmail http://jasonsavard.com/checkerPlusForGmail

Bulk70 11y ago
Speaking as someone who created an extension for a Google service (Youtube) - the name change was forced on me. My extension was taken down from the Chrome store with guidance to change the name to "XXX for YouTube" with the requirement to follow their branding guidelines etc.
Igglyboo 11y ago
I totally agree "Whatsapp for X" implies that Whatsapp proper created an application for X while "X for Whatsapp" doesn't have the same implication.
amyjess 11y ago
"[Name] for [Service]" is a popular format in the third-party client world, and it's one that's tolerated by all the big players. Much older examples include "Plume for Twitter" and "FriendCaster for Facebook". In the case of the former, it was by agreement with Twitter: Plume used to be called Touiteur until Twitter made them change it. You're seeing it more lately because Google recently changed the Play Store's app naming policy to forbid using the name of an existing service as part of your app's main brand, only allowing a special clause (e.g. "for [Service]") following the main brand. Also, around the same time, reddit changed their API policy to add a similar requirement. In the long run, it's going to be beneficial for app developers because now they can take their name and use it for apps across multiple services. For example, the developers of Plume could create a "Plume for Facebook" app and so on, so they end up with a whole family of Plume apps, each one for a different social network.
merb 11y ago
So WhatsApp for Desktop will become, "Message Reader for WhatsApp for Desktop"?
Aldo_MX 11y ago
So is "Desktop Client for WhatsApp" a better name?
- JohnyLy 11y ago
  I honestly don't think it's legal to use the name WhatsApp unless you propose a service totally different (If you sell chocolates and are called WhatsApp, there would not be any problem for example). Writing "Unofficial" or "desktop" won't change the fact that you propose the same service and using their name to promote it.

Bulk70 11y ago

Speaking as someone who created an extension for a Google service (Youtube) - the name change was forced on me. My extension was taken down from the Chrome store with guidance to change the name to "XXX for YouTube" with the requirement to follow their branding guidelines etc.

Igglyboo 11y ago

I totally agree "Whatsapp for X" implies that Whatsapp proper created an application for X while "X for Whatsapp" doesn't have the same implication.

amyjess 11y ago

"[Name] for [Service]" is a popular format in the third-party client world, and it's one that's tolerated by all the big players. Much older examples include "Plume for Twitter" and "FriendCaster for Facebook". In the case of the former, it was by agreement with Twitter: Plume used to be called Touiteur until Twitter made them change it. You're seeing it more lately because Google recently changed the Play Store's app naming policy to forbid using the name of an existing service as part of your app's main brand, only allowing a special clause (e.g. "for [Service]") following the main brand. Also, around the same time, reddit changed their API policy to add a similar requirement. In the long run, it's going to be beneficial for app developers because now they can take their name and use it for apps across multiple services. For example, the developers of Plume could create a "Plume for Facebook" app and so on, so they end up with a whole family of Plume apps, each one for a different social network.

merb 11y ago

So WhatsApp for Desktop will become, "Message Reader for WhatsApp for Desktop"?

Aldo_MX 11y ago

So is "Desktop Client for WhatsApp" a better name?

JohnyLy 11y ago
I honestly don't think it's legal to use the name WhatsApp unless you propose a service totally different (If you sell chocolates and are called WhatsApp, there would not be any problem for example). Writing "Unofficial" or "desktop" won't change the fact that you propose the same service and using their name to promote it.