Skype silences Alpha-blogger
Wow. Talk about a chilling effect.
Skype lawyer Seema Sharma emailed blogger Jan Geirnaert Friday afternoon. She told him his popular skype-watch.com and skype-gadgets.com blogs put him in legal jeopardy.
Jan, an independent IT consultant, took the implied threats seriously. He promptly blacked out skype-watch, abandoning two years of intense daily news coverage, product reviews, and wry commentary.
Jan said "I'm not a sadomasochist. Neither am I an idiot. By doing this, Skype sent me the signal not do any of this blogging wise, business wise, in any way."
He's taking his blogging "underground" to VoIP-watch.com. Pretty sure his tone will change. "Maybe they're getting too 'corporate' to tolerate any criticism" he said.
My take: Sharma, co-author of this tutorial on how to threaten people for profit, didn't consult with Skype's PR or marketing communications team before composing her email. If Sharma had, Sharma might have learned Jan's been:
- working on distribution and marketing for dozens of major Skype-affiliated companies, nurturing Skype's ecosystem.
- briefing business and government technology executives on Skype's effect on management, IT, telecom and economic policy.
- covering Skype-related news and issues at international conferences in Europe and Asia, creating unique editorial content.
- contributing to Skype Journal.
- advocating Skype passionately, online and off.
No more.
Skype didn't talk to Geirnaert like a human being, picking up the phone (or Skype) and talking with him, appreciating his business and marketing value in the blogosphere and and his past and ongoing contributions to Skype's ecosystem.
Instead, they brought in heavy guns.
In a few short emails, Skype's blown goodwill and a hard-won media asset.
I'm writing this Friday night, so it's unlikely Skype will respond to this incident until Monday, if at all.
Technorati tags: skype, skypejournal, bloggers, blogging, blogs, pr, pr2.0, mediarelations, mediarels


Comments
you're right. and it'll take a long time before Skype gets it back.
Posted by: julien | April 28, 2007 03:49 PM
This is the stupidest thing I've ever seen.
That wasn't a legal threat. The most that could have happened is the domains could have been challenged under ICANN's arbitration proceedings.
Basically they said they don't want this person to use these domains. Unless they challenge it, big whoop.
Absolutely amazing how you all reacted to this.
Posted by: Shelley | April 28, 2007 06:36 PM
Phil, where does this leave you guys?
Posted by: Tris Hussey | April 28, 2007 09:01 PM
All this means is I'll go to Gizmo and goodbye Skype. SHame, really, but I won't support any company that pulls this kind of garbage. Sounds like the RIAA.
Posted by: Dennis | April 28, 2007 10:41 PM
what about all the other www.skype-thisandthat.com domain names that blog and report about Skype ? What is the standard policy here ?
Posted by: jan geirnaert | tropicaljantie | April 29, 2007 01:01 AM
I do not think it is stupid. It is the adaquate reaction to this.
They want the benefits of this, but not the domain to be associated. This in itself is okay - but why is it up to the maker of the until now without problem running blogs to find a new solution and why should he do so?
In general, do skype have the rights to do so? Probably due to trademark rights (though I miss the reference to the applicable item). Are there ways how lawyers have to use certain phrases and descriptions? Yes.
Is it _clever_ to do so? Absolutly not. There are more intelligent ways to do so. Lawyers have to learn that too.
Posted by: Nicole Simon | April 29, 2007 01:58 AM
I agree with Shelley, this could be challenged but not everyone knows this and to be honest if a blogger has been writing positively about the company for over two years, this was probably not the smartest PR ever for Skype.
Goodwill in the blogosphere goes a long way. It only takes one thing or two things for the chillwind of change to cause people on mass to abandon a product because they suspect it has changed its values.
Proprietary Skype works well now but GTalk is more open with XMPP and if Google beef up this product as they are already then it will not take much to switch from one free product to another.
Posted by: Sam Sethi | April 29, 2007 02:54 AM
The bad decision is to start a site which you intend to make money with that contains a trademarked name. Get ready to change your name.
Posted by: Garth | April 29, 2007 07:52 AM
Is Skype becoming the new entity everyone loves to hate? First alienating developers by developing competing functionality (Jyve & Prime), then killing PR friends by closing supporting blogs. What's next closing this Blog?
Posted by: Noni Moos | April 29, 2007 08:33 AM
Hi Shelley,
I don't think it is over reacting, in this web world people take legal action for the dummiest things. I am an administrator for a non-profit campaign against some of the biggest corporations in America. This campaign seeks social responsibility and works to protect workers rights. I have already received a T.O.S. violation email. The campaign posted business contact information and quotes by these various corporate individuals. They sited posting personal information for their T.O.S. violation reasoning to Microsoft. Yahoo is notorious for releasing their users personal information, even if it is in pursuit of free speech in other countries, all in an effort to continue to make a buck. A tech blog I visit www.techcrunch.com received a threatening letter from a libel attorney based on posting information related to a CEO's past activities during a new pending merger or acquisition. Our government is attempting to make it possible to retrieve various items we post years down the road. You have to be afraid if you set up web sites or blogs for against a company or product. Some companies are vary adamant about snatching up multiple domain names to prevent this. If you are not trying to phish users, then why should you be censored from setting up a domain similar to another companies or products site. So, please don't negatively comment on someones comment, unless you understand the big picture.
Posted by: NWParsons | April 29, 2007 11:55 AM
it is indeed stupid to be busy with skype (as a hobby) for about 2 years and blog about it, to have after two years the answer that I cannot use this these domain-names, hence www.voip-watch.com. The funny thing is that viral marketing and blogs (what other advertising did skype do) made skype also bigger. the essence is that skype-gadgets.com/ skype-watch.com tried to something good for skype and create article with a different perspective on things (or should we all just write marketing?) but this make no sense anymore since skype will probably take the domains and link them to their pre-chewed marketing / pr content. this is the effect of "corporatization". You can throw any legal mumbo jumbo in my direction (i'll accept it, since cornered) but for me skype has lost it's soul. "destroying" skype-gadgets.com skype-watch.com is nothing but saying to a skype gadgets freak that he is not welcome. well so be it and i'll step aside. Others will surely do a better job.
Posted by: jan geirnaert | tropicaljantie | April 29, 2007 04:02 PM
Shelley, I agree with you. This was not the most intimidating of letters or legal action. But Skype's IP lawyers are aggressive, are known for taking all domain disputes to a higher level. They've applied this to software developers who named their products vSkype or the like, members of Skype's own developer program.
Jan doesn't have the budget for any legal action, isn't inclined to fight an uphill battle against a well funded eBay/Skype. He took this as a final straw, a strong signal his efforts were unwanted. I'm not sure that was the intended message, but that's one of the hazards of formal communication.
This event follows half a dozen attempts on Jan's part to set up a working relationship with Skype as a regional systems integrator, evangelist, and consultant; nothing coming of it.
What makes this situation noteworthy, Shelley is that, aside from the Skype employees who blog about Skype, there are only a handful of bloggers that regularly cover Skype-the-company, its products, its ecosystem, and their progress in the marketplace. Where you'd expect a company still trying to win a foothold in the US/Canadian market to nurture bloggers like Jan...
Posted by: Phil Wolff | April 29, 2007 04:33 PM
I wonder if it is also not alowed to use a sub-domain with the word 'Skype' in it?
I have been running http://skype-buzz.blogspot.com since 2005 and I would not like to receive a similar 'surprise'...
Posted by: Johan | April 30, 2007 01:16 AM
I don't want to defend trademark bullies here but people are way over-reacting to this, especially Geirnaert. It seems that he wrote them asking for _permission_ to use the Skype name in his blog and in some blog merchandise. They wrote back "it is not our policy to give permission." Which is the same as every single company I have ever seen, except Linden Labs. He was silly to even ask.
They did not tell him they objected to his site. They just said they don't give permission. He doesn't need permission to use their name in a site that reports on Skype, and neither do you, as long as there is no likelihood that users will think your blog is an official Skype organ, which there isn't.
They should not have thrown in that bit about trying to take away domains from people with skype in them. I'm sure it's true as well, but they didn't say they wanted to take away his domains, which can pretty much be taken as saying they won't. (Because that would be stupid.)
There really is no story here, except over-reaction to lawyerese that he asked for. Had they sent such a letter out of the blue, you could get worried, but if you thought they were going to write back with anything but a letter like this, you were incorrect.
Posted by: Brad | April 30, 2007 11:42 AM
you are over-reacting. read carefully the original letter from Skype:
I should mention that we are always happy when third parties enthusiastically promote Skype however, we will not endorse promotional activities (e.g the promotion of your sites www.skype-gadgets.com and www.skype-watch.com on chopsticks) where Skype has no control over the domains in question.
It is a simple matter of rights to a name. I personally don't see the Big Corporate Conspiracy you refer to.
Posted by: F.Prefect | May 3, 2007 08:57 AM
The opening paragraph of this blog is just wrong. You say "She told him his popular skype-watch.com and skype-gadgets.com blogs put him in legal jeopardy." Wrong. She told him that registering a domain name that includes "Skype" is in legal jeopardy. Concerning th e content of his blogs, she basically thanks him for his enthusiasm. Read the letter again.
Posted by: F.Prefect | May 3, 2007 09:00 AM
add to that www.skypegadgets.com.cn and www.skypegadgets.cn of a befriended party who forwarded the domains to www.skype-gadgets.com :)
Posted by: jan geirnaert | tropicaljantie | October 28, 2007 06:08 PM