Dear Instagram

https://blog.bolt.co/2014/07/28/dear-instagram

by stanleydrew • 12 years ago

347 125 12 years ago

blog.bolt.co

ivraatiems6• 12 years ago

This is a well-written appeal. I'm sure, however, that there's no intention of getting Instagram to actually do anything - the fact it was posted publicly, along with the "hurts us more than it hurts you" line makes that obvious to me.

But maybe that was obviously the point to everyone, and my comment is rendered unnecessary.

vjvj• 12 years ago

Sure the public appeal is a better option for a small start up to put pressure Instagram to use a different name rather than a behind the scenes legal notice...

ivraatiems6• 12 years ago

Absolutely! That's exactly my point. And again, I'm not saying that's wrong or bad. I'm saying it's the smart, albeit cynical move.

sbarre• 12 years 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• 12 years ago

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

benihana• 12 years 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.

ivraatiems6• 12 years 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.

JoshTriplett• 12 years ago

This looks like a request for public support together with a subtle threat:

We've been using the Bolt name in the mobile messaging market for a year, and technically we have to "police our mark", otherwise we risk losing it.
We don't want a legal battle over this, and we think it's not too late for you to consider an alternate name before launch.

goodside• 12 years ago

It's hard to have much sympathy when your app already has an identical name (and a very similar logo) to a mobile web browser launched four years earlier: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolt_(web_browser)

freehunter3• 12 years ago

Fortunately, Bolt browser no longer exists and names, especially four letter common words, can't be reserved forever.

grabeh7• 12 years ago

Technically they can. I could register whatever sequence of letters I want provided they can act as a unique identifier for me, and are not in themselves descriptive. If I register 'Bolt' for dog-walking services this is not descriptive and provided I pay my renewal fees I can protect the word forever, and take action against those whose use of it confuses users (for example 'Bolt' for dog food) or takes unfair advantage of the reputation in my mark.

The presence of a word in a dictionary/its length has no bearing on its registrability as a trade mark.

davb• 12 years ago

I think the difference here is that the Bolt web browser was discontinued in 2011 (according to the Wikipedia article you linked), whereas the OPs "Bolt" voice/SMS service is very much an active project.

renekooi• 12 years ago

Idunno, the web browser has been discontinued for 3 years now. It also seems that bolt.co and Instagram's Bolt are much more similar to each other (apps dedicated to person→person communication) than Bolt the browser is to either of them, so the risk of confusion is much smaller.

untog2• 12 years ago

It also seems that bolt.co and Instagram's Bolt are much more similar to each other (apps dedicated to person→person communication)

I disagree. A web browser is used for person to person communication too. All three are used for very, very different forms of it, though.

kevando• 12 years ago

It's also hard to sympathize over confusion around a 4 letter word that's ALREADY a word.

daddykotex• 12 years ago

I hope they change the name.

Since Instagram is owned by Facebook and Facebook has launched Slingshot, a Snapchat rival, I'm wondering why they need another one?

ivraatiems6• 12 years ago

With acquisitions, Facebook has generally left the acquired company mostly alone (if it's big and successful already). Instagram, Occulus and WhatsApp as examples. Instagram competes with Facebook in some ways, too, but it's still separate.

Their goal is more data, not less competition.

trothamel• 12 years ago

Is collecting data the goal, or simply diversification?

My theory is that Facebook (the company) is preparing for the day when Facebook (the website) goes the way of Friendster and Myspace, and they're attempting to have other lines of business when that happens.

minimaxir• 12 years ago

Slingshot is dead in the water, having fallen out of the Top 200 for its category.

Facebook must be trying for a round 3.

fred_durst• 12 years ago

I have a feeling Facebook is becoming a bit of an integrated app holdings company. Where as Amazon and Google have turned their infrastructure to the public, Facebook appears to be using it and its large investment dollars to be building a type of decentralized(partly) tech conglomerate.

It's almost as if they took their lessons from the struggles in becoming a platform for third parties and decided that there are only a small number of core applications people use. Instead of waiting for, and having less control of these high profile apps, Facebook instead is just owning them outright.

MichaelApproved• 12 years ago

I don't see a trademark claim for the name Bolt on their website. I bet, had they gotten one, they would have an easier time defending the name. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

tzakrajs• 12 years ago

I don't see this as getting any more interesting than Instagram ignoring this plea.

scott_s2• 12 years ago

Claiming a trademark is distinct from registering a trademark. You can claim a trademark by just saying "this is our trademark." That will typically be done with the "TM" symbol. Registering a trademark means you applied with the USPTO to get a registered trademark, and it was granted.

You are correct in that they don't make an explicit claim, but I'm not sure if trademark law actually requires you to do that. It would certainly make everything less messy.

chimeracoder2• 12 years ago

I'm not sure if trademark law actually requires you to do that.

It definitely does not. It certainly could influence a court decision (there's always a degree of uncertainty with any court case), but you absolutely can defend a mark that you have not explicitly claimed or registered, as long as you can demonstrate sufficiently widespread prior use.

chimeracoder2• 12 years ago

I don't see a trademark claim for the name Bolt on their website.

This is a very common misconception. Trademarks do not need to be registered in order to be defended (and even registering a trademark does not mean you can defend it).

Registering a trademark might have prevented this situation, but only if the Instagram lawyers took the time to search the USPTO database for marks matching "Bolt" (but even then, it's not a guarantee since (A) the search interface is pretty bad, and (B) they may have decided to go ahead and use it anyway).

berberous• 12 years ago

If you search the trademark database it looks like they only filed for an application 5 days ago.

dimillian• 12 years ago

Also, Facebook have a library named bolt: https://developers.facebook.com/blog/post/2014/01/30/let-s-b...

coder23• 12 years ago

That is not in direct competition to Bolt. If Instagram launched a game or a washing service called Bolt, there would be no problem.

5teev• 12 years ago

"Bolts Framework" is rather different from, and clearly not competing with, "Bolt."

eps• 12 years ago

Let's not forget Disney's Bolt while we are at it!

jaredmcdonald• 12 years ago

*"bolts"

danvesma• 12 years ago

Lets go with "Dolt"

coldcode• 12 years ago

These days people seem to prefer using actual words as names which can only result in conflicts like this one. At least names like Flikr are pretty unique.

uptown3• 12 years ago

Clickable link to the Bolt homepage: https://bolt.co/

I always find it annoying when the blog company logo doesn't bring you back to the company's homepage.

scott_s2• 12 years ago

Me too, but this one does: the far right link. I had to click most of the links on the top to figure that out, though.

uptown3• 12 years ago

Ah - good call. I totally missed that link.

Alupis• 12 years ago

I think we can surmise Instagram is not going to change the name of their new product just because this company wrote a blog post.

They will need to compel Instagram into doing so.

mikejarema• 12 years ago

Me too, so what is best practice?

I put together a simple layout for my company's blog and made this link very explicit specific, see: http://blog.vidoyen.com

Is that more in line with a blog reader would generally expect? I'm genuinely curious, because I've seen variants of this comment time and time again on HN.

quaunaut• 12 years ago

Your site would actually make it pretty easy:

Have the logo redirect to your homepage. Have the 'Blog' go to the blog feed.

Logos that don't go to the homepage drive me batty.

uptown3• 12 years ago

My personal preference is for the top-left logo to always bring a user back to the domain's top-level ignoring any sub-domains, though I'm not sure that could be considered best-practice.

This approach works for me though, because I find most company-blogs to have a much lower volume of published content than a website whose primary function is that of a blog. In most cases, I've wound up on the site from a direct-link to whatever blog post I'm reading. If what I've read in that post is interesting, I'm probably going to want to check out the product or service they're selling before reading any more of their company blog.

brandonmenc4• 12 years ago

Imagine how it would have felt if Google or Apple or Facebook had launched a photo-sharing app called Instagram in 2011.

"Bolt" is a short, common word. "Instagram" is not (it's also more descriptive.)

Unfortunately, the days of naming products desirable things like "bolt," and being able to defend them, legally or not, are over.

The strange-made-up-word naming trend is annoying, but at least you're guaranteed a name no one else wants.

dblacc• 12 years ago

Unfortunately, the days of naming products desirable things like "bolt," and being able to defend them, legally or not, are over.

I have a feeling the guys at King disagree with you.

brandonmenc4• 12 years ago

Kind of my point. How deep are King's pockets...?

rythie• 12 years ago

They've got the .com though, bolt(.co) don't.

baby• 12 years ago

or Apple.

thomasz• 12 years ago

I'm pretty sure you can get trademark protection for short, common words, as long as they are not descriptive or common for the protected areas. You can name your car bar and your bar car, but not your bar bar and your car car.

grabeh7• 12 years ago

I think that part of the issue is that in a competitive marketplace, the risk of a third party either a) objecting to your short common word upon its creation, or b) coming along at a later date and selecting the same or similar mark are much higher than if you create a compound name or a fanciful/unusual combination of words as your mark.

Simply put, if you create a fanciful term you will be able to operate with greater reassurance that you will not face trouble in the future in relation to your choice of name.

Part of the problem here is the imbalance between the parties' respective positions. The article in fact admits that it is not users being confused that Instagram's app is related to their existing app, but the other way round. You might say that due to Instagram's size, they have the ability to instantly develop goodwill around a new app and its name (I am playing devil's advocate here to an extent).

If I was Instagram I would probably offer a small sum to Bolt.co to change their name on the basis that I could offer a sum now or know I have a deep reserve of budget for legal fees to argue that Bolt.co has not developed sufficient goodwill/reputation to be entitled to prevent Instagram's usage of 'Bolt'.

hackerboos• 12 years ago

I'm pretty sure you can get trademark protection for short, common words, as long as they are not descriptive or common for the protected areas.

Like Apple?

micampe• 12 years ago

The strange-made-up-word naming trend is annoying

Why? Is it really a “trend”?

Chevrolet, Toyota, Lexus, Microsoft, Kodak, Leica, Nikon, Canon, Nokia, Rolex. Some of these are not entirely made up, but they sound like it if you are not familiar with small Japanese towns.

brandonmenc4• 12 years ago

It being annoying seems to be, but time will tell.

"Rolex" has certainly played out to be a great made-up name.

"Weebly"... eh, I'm not putting my money on that one.

http://gawker.com/5062667/the-15-dumbest-web-20-startup-name...

ajross• 12 years ago

Toyota is the name of the founder, though the transliteration is archaic. We'd spell it "Toyoda" today.

LeonidasXIV2• 12 years ago

Toyota

Actually, Toyota[1] (豊田) is indeed a Japanese town, not even particularly small and is the home of Toyota Motor Corporation.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota,_Aichi

bshimmin• 12 years ago

"Chevrolet" was the surname of one of the founders. I suppose you could say it means "goat milk" (or some combination of "goat" and "milk", anyway) in French.

badman_ting• 12 years ago

There was nothing named "Bolt" before Mr. Benton's product came around? Really?

frogpelt• 12 years ago

Yes, actually there was.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolt_%28website%29

pathy• 12 years ago

uspto.gov doesn't seem to allow linking directly to trademark filing but search for Bolt and the first two results appear to be from Bolt.co.

One was filed in the 22nd and the other on the 23rd July 2014. Seems like something they should have done earlier but I do feel for them none the less, potentially going up against FB's legal team seems less than fun.

"IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Computer application software for mobile phones, namely, software for use in text, voice and video communication between users. FIRST USE: 20131014. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20131014"

yoavush• 12 years ago

downloaded Bolt as the only way i can support from afar..

bjones53• 12 years ago

I hope the team makes the best of a bad situation and uses the attention (and possibly press) to convert supporters, like yourself, into users.

bdcravens• 12 years ago

The beta name for the first version of Adobe's ColdFusion Builder (IDE) was Bolt.

eddieroger• 12 years ago

This appeal reminded me of HipChat's situation with Messages for Mac, and the similar (but better responded to) action they took [0]. It doesn't look like Bolt did anything to lay claim to the name, and they probably don't want to go up against Facebook's lawyers. Besides, they only support Android at the moment, so to any iOS user, Bolt is completely new (and, likely, same for Android, but at least they had potential to know the product).

0. https://blog.hipchat.com/2012/02/17/they-may-just-be-chat-bu...

bhandziuk5• 12 years ago

Dear Bolt.co,

I truly wish you luck in your fight against Instagram. Name stealing is a rough game. I know because I have been traveling on Bolt buses for 8 years now (http://www.boltbus.com/). I know there is some confusion because you have basically the same symbol. Maybe there aren't too many ways to vary a lightning bolt shooting through an "O" in the word "Bolt" but I welcome you (and Instagram to try).

Sincerely, A bus rider.

diminish2• 12 years ago

and here's the cms called http://bolt.cm

I'm curious who got this name earlier.

ljf• 12 years ago

And the media sharing forum: http://bolt.cd/

virtualSatai• 12 years ago

Bolt.co registered 2010-07-21

Bolt.cm registered 2012-09-19

Bolt.cd earliest record 2011-01-04

ujjwal_wadhawan• 12 years ago

How many people remember bo.lt from 2011 ? https://www.facebook.com/getbolt

harrylepotter• 12 years ago

Not to mention the javascript framework: http://boltjs.io/

aespinoza• 12 years ago

I think this is different. Instagram's Bolt & Bolt are both Apps. Which will be searched for in the same apps stores.

Bolt Bus will definitely not be confused with the Bolt App.

bhandziuk5• 12 years ago

Probably true. Though BoltBus does have an iTunes and Android app, too.

sheetjs2• 12 years ago

I think you miss the problem here. There is very little confusion between BoltBus and Bolt.co in the sense that they are in completely different industries and the likelihood of confusion is low.

As bolt.co is claiming, there are many people who appear to be confused between instagram's offering and the company's product (they are arguably in the same space and possibly competitors).

bhandziuk5• 12 years ago

Yes, I suppose you're right. Though how big would one of these need to be for the other to care? I surely could not name my blanket company Microsoft and get away with it, right?

TheHippo• 12 years ago

The difference is that Instagram is trying to build a similar product with the same name, whereas the mentioned bus company is just a bus company that has a few stops in the United States. So most of the people living on this world will never even get chance to confuse the two of them.

matthewmacleod• 12 years ago

I don't really understand in what way this would be considered a similar product; aside from the fact it's a mobile app, they don't seem to overlap.

Smirnoff• 12 years ago

Instagram/Facebook is NOT going to do anything about the name. Just look at the history. Facebook launched an iOS app and called it "Paper." And guess what? There was a very popular app, which was called "Paper" too.

From recent cases I only remember Microsoft to change their mind in regards to their "Metro" OS. However, even in that case Microsoft decided to back off because "Metro" was a big retailer that sold Microsoft's products, so bad blood could cause bottom line to take a hit.

freehunter3• 12 years ago

They also were forced to rename Skydrive to Onedrive due to a lawsuit by the British broadcaster Sky.

Mc_Big_G• 12 years ago

Trademarks are classified by "Goods and Services". A bus company is clearly different from a mobile app. A mobile app (Instagram) is clearly the same as a mobile app (Bolt). For the purposes of trademarking, the similarity of a "mobile voice and messaging" app and a "mobile photo sharing" app is not quite as clear. I'm sure some lawyers would be happy to help clear it up.

So, while I get your intention, that's not how trademarks work. If Bolt doesn't have a trademark, they should stop complaining.

bhouston• 12 years ago

The word Bolt always has to have the lighting bolt in the "O".

Bolt (the Disney movie): http://cdnvideo.dolimg.com/cdn_assets/abd7aa3a4851f515796d9d...

Bolt Browser: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolt_(web_browser)

TallGuyShort• 12 years ago

I wish them luck, although using the name of a common machine part as a brand is kind of asking for collisions. I'm also not sure it's wise to base one of your first steps in a potential legal battle on an open letter based on leaked information...

rahimnathwani• 12 years ago

The app icon for Facebook Messenger has a bolt. It's a mobile messenger app. It uses a bolt as the main part of its logo.

toufka2• 12 years ago

Reminds me of when Facebook did this with Papers[1] too.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7171724

shekhar101• 12 years ago

Off topic, but I'm curious, how do you dig in and find old HN postings? I see a lot of people doing it.

toufka2• 12 years ago

I read the article when it came out - remembered it, and then searched for it using the bottom search bar. Took a few different search terms to find the article - but it came up relatively quickly. Not too complicated - but does require me to have read the article a while ago.

dethtron5000• 12 years ago

I worked at a startup in the late 90s called Bolt. It's hard to protect your name when it's a short, commonly-used word.

enthdegree3• 12 years ago

The #1 way to spot some 'mushy web3.0 startup' is to see if they name their fledgling product some generic, overloaded dictionary word. My perception has always been that owners choose this sort of name to market their product as 'truly the most no-nonsense utilitarian solution, for people who Get Things Done like me & u.' There have been a lot of these lately. Chosing a dull name to be cool isn't helping anyone and I hope collisons like this latest groupthink help the trend die quickly.

karjaluoto• 12 years ago

I wrote about this topic a few months back, when 53 was upset about Facebook using the "name" Paper: http://www.erickarjaluoto.com/blog/the-perils-of-naming-your...

tl;dr Using a word to name a company is easy, but indefensible.

huntleydavis• 12 years ago

I think this is a risk that bolt.co and really any startup that chooses a short 'techy' word as their company name has to factor in.

enthdegree3• 12 years ago

The #1 way to spot a mushy web3.0 social startup is to see if they named their product a generic, overloaded dictionary word. This is a really irritating recent trend. Every time I see one of these I can almost hear the 'profile picture in a circle' of the CEO pitching the name to me:

'its a really utilitarian, no-nonsense product for People Who Just Get It Done, like me & my team, so naming it out of the common English vocabulary was really the most natural expression of this'

Naming your products tired names like 'Bolt' is not bold, it's just uncreative. It helps no one: it's pretentious, it makes your product harder to find (regardless of 'how dissimilar it is to previous products'), and it makes your brand less memorable. Why would anyone want to do this to their company or their customers?

Maybe people who perpetrate this sort of situation will continue to have tensions like this one and the trend will gracefully(?) self-destruct. Hopefully the people who are capable of building valuable products will choose names which don't cost them!

enthdegree3• 12 years ago

Not as extreme a case, but does anyone remember HealthKit?

chipotle_coyote• 12 years ago

I'd say that the munging of the two words together actually makes that relatively distinctive, and in line with Apple's "BlahKit" naming convention for their API sets.

Now Pages and Numbers, on the other hand...

issa• 12 years ago

I humbly suggest changing it to "The Bolt". It's cleaner.

stasy• 12 years ago

I think it might actually make yours get more popular if they use the same name (hop on the bandwagon of their marketing)

baldajan2• 12 years ago

Bolt - you will likely lose this case, Facebook knows this. Don't litigate.

Bolt is used too often and the only way you would succeed in a reverse confusion trial is to show that you own the Bolt trademark when it comes to mobile communication - no easy task. Just look at FiftyThree's USPTO application for "Paper" and the letter of protest that was submitted.

You only recently filed for the mark in the USPTO, and even by some miracle you get it through the PTO, Facebook/Instagram can still file a Letter of Protest or file an Opposition in the TTAB.

Unfortunately, even though you have rights to the name Bolt, you likely won't be able to enforce it. That said, neither Facebook nor Instagram can successfully litigate against you in court.

chrischen• 12 years ago

Instagram also harassed us over our name Instapainting.com. They decided to ban us from using Facebook services unless we changed our name.

Dear Instagram

Related Stories