Your software is often used in conjunction with zendesk, you say it yourself and they both use "zenX" branding.
To me that could easily lead to confusion as a customer might believe they are are part of a suite of SaaS offerings under the "zen" brand (i.e. zendesk branching out).
I make no comment on the rest of the story, just that specific bit.
[Edit]: Maybe I should have said 'low-ranking imps advocate' instead :p
I don’t know - I use zencoder and zendesk. Just because your product has a wide and diverse user base, like zendesk’s, doesn’t mean it’s easily confused with every other product who’s name is related.
I don’t assume there is an affiliation between the zencoder and zendesk. Personally I wouldn’t think there was much overlap between Billing and Customer Support, either - and I would not be confused in the least. (From the names - branding could clearly connect the 2)
Plus the number of startups with Zen in their name is huge: http://www.crunchbase.com/search?query=zen (which is a bad query as it excludes zen embedded in the name like we are discussing - but good as the number of relevant results is still ~30. And it’s the best I could find on short notice.)
He pretty much gets that (I think) - this isn't a complaint against the fact that Zendesk are doing this, it's a complaint about the way they've gone about it.
Now, zendesk doesn't own the word zen do they? Does this mean anyone in the world now can not use the word zen anywhere in the name if they are in the SaaS business?
I believe they also had a problem with a company named FreshDesk which was a direct competitor.
This analogy breaks down because Twitter (when they started out) wanted everyone to use their API, they want people to associate their app with their platform (e.g. TweetDeck and TweetBot)
ZenDesk on the other hand cannot be said to do the same.
This is one of the more reasonable trademark defenses by one of the "big guys" that I've seen - one they are required to defend in order to keep. So, though it hurts, you pick a new name and move on. Very possibly the lawyers told the CEO to not respond to those emails until a decision was made.
As an aside, the post starts by saying "it's not something to get worked up about" -- and then proceeds to do nearly exactly that, detailing even his email "exchange" with the CEO.
Lots of the comments here seem to be missing the point.
I think he pretty clearly states that it's not the technicality, or legitimacy, of the trademark dispute that is bothering him, it's the fact that his friend of 12 years did not treat him like the friend he thought he was by speaking to him like a normal human being. Instead, the "friend" hid behind his lawyers to do the deed.
That is ridiculous. I was considering using zendesk for a product of mine but not any more. anythingdesk is a naming convention I've seen many times. Because it's a helpdesk hence the name. To claim that anybody using that little play on words is ripping them off is shameful. Maybe zendesk should look at who they 'ripped-off' http://www.helpdesk.com/
If I was Zendesk, I would do exactly that, fight your trademark. Not that their objections will necessarily hold up. You could arguably defend it, but why bother?
If you say you are friendly with Zendesk, why did you name your product Zen-something if there is no strict affiliation between the companies, it doesn't make any sense, it should be lesson for others. The thing is that "being friendly" is not really tangible in legal terms. In fact it's the "being friendly" part that probably brought this on because if Zendesk hadn't heard of you and their customers weren't using Zenbilling then your application would probably have done through without hassle.
I know, and probably Zendesk do too, that what they are doing isn't strictly "nice" to you. But there wasn't any official partnership or other deal or agreement in place and that ultimately means there is no relationship between the companies.
What you are doing is right, find a new name and move on. But don't let it spoil your "friendship", and although probably there's no room for "favours" anymore, keep your mind open for mutually beneficial agreements instead.
What if Zend comes out with software called Esk? That would be super confusing between Zendesk and Zend Esk, so it would be better if you changed it before Zend does that.
I think if people believe that anyone using names that have been used for hundreds and thousands of years are going to preempt everyone else from doing so (zen, book...) they should not have used those names in the first place. If you want to prohibit all derivations of your name the rule should become that you have to make up a completely new word. If you chose a commonly known word then don't expect to prohibit everyone else from doing so.
Maybe consider yourself lucky that you'll be prevented from ludicrously associating your business with the word Zen although said business is, as a provider of rationalist technology, almost by definition completely at odds with the school of Buddhism by that name.
In any case, the victimized tone of the article is about as un-Zen as it gets.
> as a provider of rationalist technology, almost by definition completely at odds with the school of Buddhism by that name.
Why would you say this? Gautama Buddha was a very pragmatic leader (not allowing sick and handicapped to seek refuge in his temples because this would drive away wealthy supporters), and Buddhism is still very much rooted in the present and in the actual reality when contrasted against religions that rely on some concept of "afterlife".
I was just thinking zedbilling - it sounds close enough (to my american pronounciation) that most people won't even think you've changed your name. Then you can have a tagline like "all your billing solutions, from a to zed" :)
Your software is often used in conjunction with zendesk, you say it yourself and they both use "zenX" branding.
To me that could easily lead to confusion as a customer might believe they are are part of a suite of SaaS offerings under the "zen" brand (i.e. zendesk branching out).
I make no comment on the rest of the story, just that specific bit.
[Edit]: Maybe I should have said 'low-ranking imps advocate' instead :p