And here’s TweetMeme:
They are both pretty similar, albeit not identical. On the other hand, both have ripped Digg off, so what’s the big deal, right?
Well maybe the big deal is the fact that Retweet.com isn’t trying to brand itself more uniquely. That might or might not mean something. Maybe they want us to mix them up while trying to catch up to the mighty lead that TweetMeme, the Digg of tweets, or maybe they just think this is the best way to present the service?
That race might be a short one, should Twitter get its way with the phrase “retweet”. On the other hand, the microblogging service is eying “tweet” as well so that could possibly mean that TweetMeme hangs loose as well. For some reason I think Retweet.com is more in Twitter’s headlights, but maybe that’s just me reacting to what’s been written online?
Anyway, all those trademark thoughts might not mean so much. Sam Johnston has a nice post (found via Mashable) on the matter. In short, if you follow his reasoning, the idea that “tweet” might be trademarked by Twitter isn’t likely to happen. The same should apply to “retweet”, meaning that Retweet.com might be in the clear.
Three things strike me:
- Will Retweet.com be able turn all those big heavy blogs already having implementet the TweetMeme button around to its server? There needs to be money and gains involved for that to happen, and the chance of winning $10,000 isn’t likely to do the trick with these giants.
- If Twitter should be able to trademark “retweet” and “tweet”, is Retweet.com more exposed to cease and desists than TweetMeme? I would think so. And don’t forget, the @retweet Twitter account is suspended.
- What will happen if Twitter gets serious about retweets? They are working on it, and that might mean the end of both services, although not very likely in my opinion. But think about it, a pumped up Twitter with retweet exposure, why not push that rather than TweetMeme or Retweet.com?
What do you think, does Retweet.com stand a chance at all?