I just realized I never got a chance to post a fun project I did this summer at Square! I made a game where you can learn about Square’s history and play as Jack Dorsey, going through Square’s 4 Corners (four concepts that all Squares should strive to work towards) in a few different maps - some show our sellers and others represent Square HQ (they’re modeled after it!).
Check it out here -Â sq-four-corners.herokuapp.com
Watch out though - it’s a bit buggy and is definitely a hacky hack week project.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
âś“ Live Streamingâś“ Interactive Chatâś“ Private Showsâś“ HD Qualityâś“ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
While you can buy a $500 iPad at Amazon.com with a single click, sending even small amounts of cash to a friend or relative is still often a tedious and slow task. In most cases, you wind up doing exactly what you would have in 1957--writing a check and mailing it. The recipient then has to cash it or deposit it in her bank account.
But starting Tuesday, you can just email cash, free of charge, directly from your debit card to anyone else's, regardless of what bank each party uses. There's no login or password to remember and no special software or hardware required--you just use email. It works on both ends using any email service or program on any email-capable device, whether a computer, a smartphone or a tablet.
This new service, called Square Cash, comes from Square Inc., best known for equipping small brick-and-mortar merchants with smartphone-swiping devices that allow them to accept credit cards, and with tablets that act as sophisticated cash registers.
Square Cash permits you to send up to $2,500 a week in several transactions or all at once. At launch, it works only in the U.S., and with debit cards carrying either the Visa or MasterCard logo. It isn't meant for buying things from merchants, online or off, only for person-to-person cash transfers.
There are other services that allow you to send money from one person to another digitally. You can do it via PayPal, or via a newer service called Venmo, which PayPal is in the process of acquiring. But I believe Square is simpler and more private. For instance, PayPal places received money in a PayPal account and you must transfer it to your bank in a separate step. Venmo has a strong social component that encourages users to post when payments are made.
I tested Square Cash, sending and receiving money in amounts ranging from $10 to over $1,000, with eight people, and it worked rapidly and flawlessly. I can recommend it for anyone who needs to pay a small debt, give a cash gift, split a bill, or send cash quickly and easily.
I sent several $5, $10 and $25 amounts, and asked for and received, all or part of the money back, in order to test receiving money. I also used Square Cash to settle a real bill, with a friend, to pay my half of a shared $2,223.76 fee she had covered. It worked fine in every case.
The people helping me test were generally wowed. One called it "slick." Another replied: "Done. Two secs." A third, with whom I had trouble using PayPal last year, said she'd use it "1,000%."
There is one big caveat: You have to trust Square. The company has a strong track record in its merchant business, so it isn't brand new to the money-transfer business. And Square says it has strong security measures and close human and machine monitoring for possible fraud. If fraud is suspected, the company says it can and will reverse the fund transfer. Still, digital services do get hacked, and email can be manipulated by thieves. The service notifies you via email or text that it appears you have sent money, which gives you a chance to cancel a transaction that didn't come from you or was a mistake.
So, if you don't trust Square to defeat such things, you shouldn't use Square Cash.
Here's how Square Cash works. Say you want to send $47.12 to your sister. You just compose an email with her email address in the "To" field and, in the "CC" field, you enter "[email protected]." In the subject field, you enter the amount you're sending--in this case, "$47.12." You can leave the message body blank, or add a note explaining you're sending the money and why. Then, you just press Send.
If this is your first time using the service, Square will email you a link to its service, where you'll be asked to enter your debit-card information. This is required one time only.
In seconds, Square verifies the debit card and checks that you have sufficient funds, using existing, routine Visa or MasterCard procedures, and sends an email to your sister. (Square says it never knows how much is in your account, and it encrypts your card number.)
Your sister will receive two emails: the one from you and a second from Square saying you're sending her the money. If she accepts the payment and it's her first time using the service, she will be asked to click a link to Square and enter her debit-card information.
Once that's verified, the transfer is made, and the money will show up in her bank account in one to two days. She will also be empowered to send money herself.
No other account setup is required. You never need to create, or enter, a login or password. And the money goes straight from bank to bank. Neither party needs to create a fund balance with Square.
Square says most payments appear in the recipient's account in one day. And it says a significant minority of payments appear immediately, something it hopes to make commonplace as soon as possible.
There's one more twist, however. This simple verification system works only for transfers of up to $250 a week. To qualify for the full $2,500 limit--which is also free--you have to provide some added information, one time only. You can give Square your Facebook credentials, or provide your full name, date of birth, and the last four digits of your Social Security number.
If you choose the Facebook option, Square says it passes no information to Facebook at all and never posts what you're doing on Facebook, or shares your financial activity. It says it merely looks at your Facebook profile and activity, as a Facebook friend could, in order to verify that you are a real person, with an established account there.
Square Cash does have apps for Apple and Android mobile devices, but you never need to use them. All they do is let you enter an amount you wish to transfer and automatically create an email, ready to send.
So how does Square make money from Square Cash? It says it has no plans to send you ads or offers, even for merchants with whom it does business. Instead, it plans to offer paid, premium options. One example: the ability to use Square Cash internationally.
Square Cash does have some downsides. At launch, there's no way to see a history of your transactions. Square says your past email shows that. And the company makes no promise to pay you back from its own funds in the case of fraud, only to reverse the transaction. It also has no limit on your liability from fraud. And at launch, it only links a debit card to one email address at a time, so sending from, or to, an unlinked email address can require a new setup.
However, Square Cash is the quickest, simplest method I've seen for sending money from one person to another.
Square Inc. Files 12th Opposition, Ends Indy’s Free Squarejive App in Federal Court
September 3rd, 2013
---COAL IN MY STOCKING---
Fast forward to the end of December 2012 three days after Christmas I received an email and letter from a Silicon Valley based law firm, Fenwick & West, which would qualify as the equivalent to receiving coal in one’s stocking. The letter was on behalf of the mobile payment-processing giant "Square Inc." Enclosed was a cease and desist message warning us to withdraw our trademark application and phase out our marks.
Square Inc. Cease Desist Letter by Charles E. Kelly
After the initial shock faded away, I forwarded the message onto my attorney who then itemized the reasons we were not infringing upon their mark "Square." Apparently, having a different name, color scheme, service description, and operating in a different realm of software was not enough in the minds of Square's attorneys.
We kindly replied to their letter informing them that our events app is in Indianapolis only, does not offer payment-processing services, and we see little to no likelihood of confusion being caused by our mark; therefore, we strongly disagree with their claims of infringement. We then continued the application process to get our trademark published by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
---THREATS CONTINUED---
On February 18th I learned that Square Inc.’s attorneys at Fenwick & West called my attorney to reiterate their intentions to oppose our trademark. Fenwick & West demanded we cease using our name, and rebrand our application immediately.
I'm not sure how familiar you are with the trademark process, but under the Lanham Act, any party who feels they may be damaged by the actual or proposed registration of a mark is entitled to challenge its registration. This is accomplished by filing a Notice of Opposition with the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB).
The TTAB is the administrative tribunal that hears and decides oppositions and cancellations and appeals of final refusals issued by examining attorneys. Thus an opposition initiates a Federal proceeding in which the TTAB reviews evidence from both sides and determines whether to prevent a pending application for a mark from being granted registration. –Learn More About Trademarks http://www.uspto.gov
My initial reaction to this news was much like you'd expect... "Fuck Them, lets go to court, we'll win this case." To my surprise, my attorney adamantly agreed. He said we would win the case, it would take a long time and we would ultimately win. However, he then proceeded to tell me that while we are being unfairly picked on, and stand a great chance at winning the case, the case will never happen...Â
It was at this point that he advised me that the cost associated with fighting their opposition would be roughly $75,000 dollars if the case reaches the trial stage. He knew I struggled to pay the few thousand dollars I'd already paid him, and would not be able to afford a long and expensive paperwork trial.
Infuriated, I then asked him if I could raise the $75k to cover the trial, and we win the case, would Square Inc. be required to pay restitution to cover the cost of our legal fees? “Unfortunately, No,” he replied. “In only 10-15% of cases where a company’s trademark is opposed and goes to trial only to be vindicated, are they reimbursed for their legal expenses.” [A company must prove an opposition was filed with malicious intent in order to receive restitution for their legal expenses]
---COST OF DOING BUSINESS---
After a few more phone calls, February came and went and I started to think Square maybe bluffing about their intentions to file against us. After all, we’re a tiny company operating in a completely different market, targeting different customers, nowhere near their 2 Million + users and $3.25 Billion dollar valuation (Sept. 2012).
On April 23rd, 2013, the USPTO published our trademark, giving Square Inc. a 30 day window to oppose and stop our mark from reaching the final registration phase. Unfortunately, another tactic that trademark opponents use to their advantage is TIME. They slow down the process to make the trademark filer spend more money on legal fees, while creating a state of uncertainty, and diverting their attention away from conducting their business. After all, who would want to spend money on marketing while not knowing whether their name will be theirs in a few months?
After our mark was published on April 23rd, Square Inc. filed a written request to extend the amount of time they'd have to file their opposition. The maximum allowable period of time for an opposition extension is 120 days, which Square was ultimately granted. This gave Square until August 21st, 2013, to scheme as to why we should not be allowed to register Squarejive, and file their opposition. Additionally, the 120 day extension made it really hard for us to continue with business as usual.
On April 30th when my attorney informed me that Square had been granted the 120 day extension, I froze spending on marketing across the board. No more Facebook advertisements, no more event sponsorships, and absolutely no more promoted Tweets on Twitter; especially since Square Inc’s Founder & CEO, Jack Dorsey, is also "The Founder of Twitter" (*Suggested Reading: Hatching Twitter, A True Story of Money, Power, Friendship, & Betrayal).  As a social events application, this crippled our engagement tremendously; however, I couldn't justify spending funds to market a brand that might not exist in the near future.
---DOES SQUARE INC.’s CASE HAVE MERIT?---
After Square’s extension period ended on August 21st, 2013, the attorneys at Fenwick & West formally filed an opposition against us viewable online here: http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?qs=91212122
In order to oppose a trademark, one must give grounds for their opposition. Typically, they try show how the publication of a mark causes confusion for their pre-existing mark. In our case Square Inc. filed under grounds of “Deceptiveness,” “False suggestion of a connection,” “Priority and likelihood of confusion,” and “Dilution.” Furthermore, they opposed all of the goods and services descriptions for our trademark.
Without going too deep into US & International trademark classes or filing requirements, allow me to demonstrate how feeble this opposition really is; when Square Inc. filed their trademark, they did so with the following Goods & Services description:
Mark: Square (LINK)
US Serial Number: 77798169
Registration Date: Feb. 08, 2011
Goods & Services Description:
Hardware and software for processing credit card, debit card, and gift card transactions via mobile devices.
Also they filed again in May of 2011 with a slightly different Goods & Services description:
Mark: Square (LINK)
US Serial Number: 77798170
Registration Date: May 17, 2011
Goods & Services Description:
Reconciling credit card, debit card, and gift card accounts transactions via a global computer network
When we filed the mark “Squarejive” in October of 2012, we did so with the following Goods & Services description:
Mark: Squarejive (LINK)
US Serial Number: 85755677 & 85755628
Registration Date: OPPOSED PRIOR TO REGISTRATION
Goods & Services Description:
Computer application software for mobile phones, portable media players and handheld computers, namely, software for accessing, submitting and searching information about current entertainment events, restaurants and food markets.
---HOW GIANTS STOP INNOVATION---
In the previous paragraphs I outlined one tactic giant companies use to prevent competition: oppose a competitor’s trademark to stop it from being registered from the get-go.
With a conservative estimate at $75,000 – the legal fees associated with fighting an opposition through trial are daunting. Even worse, spending the money to successfully fight an opposition and be vindicated, doesn't mean you'll be reimbursed for your legal expenses and time. In fact, there is a very low probability you will be able to prove the party opposing your mark did so with malicious intent. Thus, you'll be responsible for the extravagant fees associated with your defense.
As we all know, the real advantage large companies have over small companies is resources. Large organizations have the funds and skilled on-call legal teams available to block competitors they deem to be threats. They do this by filing oppositions and blocking the applicant from ever getting registered with Federal rights to the mark. The evidence in support of their opposition is usually shaky at best, but that doesn't really matter. When facing a weaker opponent, large companies simply need to follow the proper procedure and file the correct documents on the correct dates, and then let time and financial strain take hold.
While the number of oppositions filed each year is quite small compared to the number of trademarks published, Square Inc. is no stranger to filing them. Since June 1st, 2012 Square Inc. has filed a dozen oppositions: SQUAREUP, SQUARECHIC, SQUARESPOT, SQUARE TABLE, SQUARECARD, SQUARE UP, SPOTSQUARE, ESQUARE, FAIR SQUARE COM, and of course SQUAREJIVE. (See for yourself)
As I mentioned earlier, using extensions to drag out the process also behooves large companies. Often times the mere threat of a Silicon Valley-based law firm can be enough to provoke a trademark applicant to abandon their mark. However, when that doesn’t work, trademark opponents will file an extension and let the long, slow, process start to sap the applicant’s financial resources. Sending frequent emails and setting up times to chat with an applicant’s counsel also are also effective ways to invoke financial strain.
While Square Inc. is valued well over $3 Billion dollars, as a startup company, every dollar we have is needed. When we started to spend dollars that would be going towards marketing, on legal expenses, our growth stalled and customer engagement dwindled.
The motivations behind filing an opposition to a trademark differ greatly, but there is one common motivation and reward. Each opposition sets a precedent for future proceedings. As large companies file oppositions and crush opponents with even meagerly similar marks, they strengthen their own marks in doing so.
---WHERE WE’RE HEADED---
So there you have it, that's all I got for you. Just a classic example of how a giant company who processed $10 billion in payments last year can take a startup to court and financially crush them. It doesn't matter that our trademark was published by the USPTO, that we took all the necessary preemptive steps to ensure we were not infringing upon another mark, or that many other companies’ names in software include the word "Square" (i.e. Foursquare, Squarespace, Square Enix, ect.), justice isn't given a chance unless you have at minimum $75,000 worth of throw away money to go to trial and seek it.
During the past 6 months many people have asked me “Why don't you just change your name?” The honest answer is we can't afford it. The cost & time associated with rebranding and remarketing everything from our automated emails, website, marketing swag, redirecting all of our 10,000+ “Squarejive.com” URL’s, and once again branding/resubmitting our mobile app to Apple is not something we can afford financially or from a time perspective.
While the majority of this post has been negative, I am excited about one thing, the birth of FindJive. As a result of Square’s opposition, over the past few weeks we've started to create a strategic design consultancy and web development company. What really makes us unique is we don't have a fixed pricing model for our work: true to our startup roots, we provide assistance to small companies at a fraction of the cost we charge larger companies. In some cases, we'll even build applications pro bono (See IndyCollegeMentors.com currently under construction).
Some people compare starting a company to having a child because of all the time, energy, and financial strain associated. I think this is an accurate analogy and probably explains what drove me to write over 2,000 words about the death of my child. However, I also hope that in sharing my experience, I'll encourage others to do the same, and ultimately provoke the system to change. By allowing unnecessary oppositions that require small fortunes to defend, the current process is intrinsically inhibitive to innovation.
While I remain driven to build creative software products, I'll now do so under the name FindJive. If you have questions about trademarks, or curiosities about what we're working on today, feel free to contact us at [email protected] or send me a personal email at [email protected].
If you feel compelled to help reform the current trademark process, we'd appreciate it if you'd join our campaign here: http://chn.ge/17pEe8M
Sincerely,
Charles E. Kelly IV
Co-Founder at Squarejive -->Â FindJive
VANCOUVER, B.C .: OCTOBER 24, 2012 -- Creator and founder of Twitter and Square, inc., Jack Dorsey is pictured in the Pacific Rim hotel in Vancouver, British Columbia on October 24, 2012. Â (Ben Nelms for Macleans Magazine)
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
âś“ Live Streamingâś“ Interactive Chatâś“ Private Showsâś“ HD Qualityâś“ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Twitter Founder Pushes Square’s Payment Device Into Wal-Mart
Square Inc., the mobile payments company created by Twitter Inc.     co-founder Jack Dorsey, said its credit-card reader for smartphones will be available in Wal-Mart Stores Inc.’s locations nationwide, boosting the number of retail outlets where it is sold to more than 9,000.
The reader, which lets businesses handle payments via mobile devices, was previously available in about 200 Apple stores, as well as Target Corp., RadioShack Corp. and Best Buy Co. outlets.
Square is targeting small businesses that may not be able to afford machinery that handles credit cards, Chief Operating Officer Keith Rabois said in an interview. The company is vying with EBay Inc.’s PayPal as well as providers of so-called near field communications to help consumers pay for things on the go. At stake is a mobile commerce market that Juniper Research predicts will surge to $670 billion in 2015... Go to www.BusinessWeek.com for the complete and original post.
