I've previously posted about Twitter's potential trademark issues. (See here ("Trademark Issues for Twitter - Follow Up").)  In a nutshell, Twitter has been fairly lax about allowing third parties, including developers, to use the term "twitter" and "tweet" in product names, domain names, promotional materials (etc.).  Conventional trademark wisdom holds that you want to prevent third parties from using your brand without your permission (and control), otherwise you will end up compromising your trademark rights. Techdirt had a post inquiring as to whether Twitter was being deliberate about this in order to foster the "ecosystem."  (Discussed by Tom O'Toole here.) 

Ultimately, I'm not sure how things will shake out, but two recent developments are worth noting.

Twitter Grumbles:  First, Twitter complained to a developer that the app built by the developer had a user interface that was too similar to Twitter's, and also complained that the developer used the word "tweet" in the name for the app.  [cNet:  "Is Twitter Freaking Out Over "Tweet" Trademark."]  In typical Twitter fashion, Twitter put out a mixed statement through a combination of private communications and statements to blogs - it didn't really issue any sort of clear pronouncement on where it stood.  Twitter stated in this blog post that when in its view a particular name became confusingly similar, Twitter would "suggest" use of an alternative name.  (How very left coast of them to merely "suggest" an alternative!) At the same time, Twitter promotes applications which incorporate "tweet" in the name, such as "TweetCraft."  Regardless of how this might bolster third party defenses against claims of infringement by Twitter (and I'm thinking it will), one thing is clear:  Twitter is not being very clear about its policy.  The ecosystem will react in shock to any sudden changes in Twitter policy.

Twitter is Added to the Dictionary:  Second, a recent story in the Telegraph noted that Twitter "gained" inclusion into the Collins English Dictionary.  [Via @ButtercupD, of course on Twitter.  See also Mashable here.]  Is this the kiss of death from a trademark standpoint?  (See, e.g., LAT:  "Will Twitter Trademark 'Tweet' Before It's Genericized?")  The Telegraph article notes that the word will appear "both as a noun and as a verb."  Inclusion of a word in a dictionary constitutes evidence that a mark has become generic.  Trademark owners typically lobby dictionary editors to prevent this.  In Twitter's defense here, I think Collins got swept up in Twitter hype when it decided to include "Twitter" and "Tweet" as words in the dictionary.  Twitter already means something, and the existing definition is a testament to Twitter's clever choice of names. I'm not sure the alternative definition really belongs in dictionaries . . . yet.  Twitter has a good argument that inclusion in this particular dictionary doesn't really mean much from a usage standpoint.  Also, the genericness analysis could play out slightly differently here than in the typical case.  Twitter is pretty unique in what it offers.  Is there any other product besides Twitter that does what Twitter does?  (Well Facebook seems to constantly aspire to, but doesn't really come close.)

Anyway, interesting tidbits worth noting.  Also, someone also mentioned an Office Action or two relating to developer trademark applications which contain "Tweet" and "Twitter."  Worth keeping an eye on. 

Added:  I forgot about this: the sponsored definitions on Twitter also promote apps which have Twitter and Tweet as part of their names:

[Dictionary image via jovike on Flickr used under a Creative Commons license.]