Mr. Musk may have successfully pushed Twitter's new name and logo, 'X', and even made the vanity domain x.com redirect to the social media website, but that's not to say, the Mathematical double-struck letter will fit the bill everywhere. Apple's App Store can't accept Twitter iOS app's new name due to minimum character requirements
  • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyzEnglish
    945·
    11 months ago

    …also started blocking the ‘x.com’ website, mistaking it for adult content.

    It’s not a mistake, twitter is no place for children. Or anyone who can think for themselves.

  • Hello_there@kbin.social
    68·
    11 months ago

    Twitter lost all the engineers that realized you could just call it “X app” and get apple to agree to the change

    • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
      3·
      11 months ago

      I honestly wouldn’t be remotely surprised if someone proposed this solution and Elon just threw a tantrum and is now demanding that Apple changes their rules for him because he wants it to just be X

      Don’t forget, this whole rebranding is basically just the culmination of a decades long tantrum about PayPal not letting him ruin their brand lol

    • ToastyWaffle@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
      1·
      11 months ago

      Haha almost exactly what I just said and it looks like you already said it. To me this just shows that the people working there right now actually have no idea what’s going on, or at least the way the decision making structure is unable to hear any feedback from the technical team in charge of implementation. Like this is mobile app developer 101 stuff.

  • johnthedoe@lemmy.mlEnglish
    55·
    11 months ago

    “Twitter was able to change the logo of their iOS app but not the name, since Apple requires app names to be at least 2 characters,”

    • ToastyWaffle@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
      2·
      11 months ago

      Just name it ‘X App’ problem solved. Anyone who has ever uploaded an app image to the app store should be well aware of the rules involved here and the Apple manual review process.

    • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.orgEnglish
      49·
      11 months ago

      Dumb on Elon. This is clearly a decision he made the Sunday afternoon before he had it rolled out. He’d teased it a long time ago, and anyone familiar with his obession with the letter X would have seen it coming, but this implementation clearly demonstrates he didn’t ask anyone to look into what would be involved with the rebrand. He just made them do it

      • Revan343@lemmy.ca
        3·
        11 months ago

        Dumb on Elon. This is clearly a decision he made the Sunday afternoon before he had it rolled out.

        Well I think he had something rolled already

  • stown@sedd.itEnglish
    26·
    11 months ago

    Just change it to Xitter . Pronounced shitter or exiter

  • ghost_laptop@lemmy.ml
    221·
    11 months ago

    Now that I think about it, is this even copyrightable? How can you copyright a letter?

      • Em Adespoton@lemmy.caEnglish
        102·
        11 months ago

        Ah, but how do you trademark a Monotype capital X when the glyph already has design protection and is part of Unicode?

        They’re taking someone else’s creation and saying “when used in this trade context, it can only belong to us.”

        • FaceDeer@kbin.social
          111·
          11 months ago

          Ah, but how do you trademark a Monotype capital X when the glyph already has design protection and is part of Unicode?

          You do it the same way everyone else trademarks stuff? I don’t see how using an existing font for the logo or the fact that it’s in Unicode makes any difference here. A logo just has to be distinctive compared to other existing trademarks, it can be made from elements that are common in other contexts.

          For example, Mastercard’s logo is just a red and a yellow circle overlapping each other. Colored circles are nothing new or unusual.

          They’re taking someone else’s creation and saying “when used in this trade context, it can only belong to us.”

          Yes. That’s how trademarks work. It’s exactly what they’re for.

          The thing that’s the stumbling block for Twitter’s rebranding is that “X” has already been trademarked by other companies, including in the context of social media. Not that it’s in Unicode.

      • ghost_laptop@lemmy.ml
        72·
        11 months ago

        Ah, I didn’t know the difference between a trademark and a copyright, it makes sense. I remember the case where Intel wanted to copyright the name of one of its old processors and they lost because they were a bunch of numbers so I thought it was comparable.

        • FaceDeer@kbin.social
          16·
          11 months ago

          The main forms of intellectual property are trademark, copyright, patent, and trade secret, and they all have significant differences from each other that cause no end of trouble when they get mixed up in common parlance. It’s not uncommon. :)

          I just did a little Googling and it seems that there’s nothing inherent wrong with trademarking numbers, Intel lost their trademark to the 386 because AMD was able to clone it and a lawsuit determined that AMD could call their clone a “386 chip” because the term had become genericized. That’s one of the things that trademarks are susceptible to that other kinds of intellectual property aren’t.

          It’s not directly relevant to Apple’s app store, but since we’re on the subject of trademarks it seems that “X” is already trademarked by a number of companies, including for “social media services” by Meta. It’s rather obvious at this point that Musk didn’t make this decision with the sort of advance preparation that he should have.

    • BrikoXOP
      15·
      11 months ago

      There are multiple active trademarks for X letter. Microsoft and Meta are two the most known (there are likely to be trademark dispute between Twitter and Microsoft based on some reporting). But trademarks have to be limited to certain activities/areas, so you can have the same trademark for 10 different companies if they don’t Intersect with their activities.

      • FaceDeer@kbin.social
        13·
        11 months ago

        One of the more interesting big-name trademark collisions I can recall is Apple Computers and Apple Records (the music label the Beatles signed under). The two companies coexisted just fine for decades, and then Apple created iTunes and all legal hell broke loose because there were now two "Apple"s in the music business.

        • Awwab@kbin.social
          5·
          11 months ago

          IIRC Apple Computers had negotiated usage of the Apple trademark for computers but was explicitly prohibited from doing anything music related with it. It was settled out of court but I am sure Apple records made a lot of money once they started up iTunes.