How We Named This Blog — 5 Rejections and a Lesson (The Making of Markive, Part 1)

This blog is called Markive. But before that name existed, five other names were born — and buried.

Today we're publishing the full autopsy. If you're naming a blog, a brand, or a side project, consider this a map of the landmines we already stepped on for you.

The hard part isn't thinking of a name

Coming up with a decent name is surprisingly easy. The hard part comes next: finding out whether it already belongs to someone else.

Skip that step and two problems await. The first is legal — trademarks. The second is quieter and, for a blog, far deadlier: search invisibility. If a well-known service already owns your name, people who search for you will find them. Every result, every page. For a blog that lives on search traffic, that's a death sentence signed on day one.

Our process was a loop: brainstorm candidates with AI (Claude), then verify each one against real web searches. The AI's job was speed — generating options and compiling what the searches turned up. The human's job was judgment — "do we love it, and is it us?" Here's how the loop played out, body count included.

Five rejections, in order of death

Candidate 1: Logolab. "A laboratory for logos" — we liked the sound of it. Then we searched. Logolab.app, a logo-testing tool with tens of thousands of users. Logolab Studio in Malaysia. Logolab Creations LLC in California. An app on Google Play. Even an AI logo service using the same name in Korean. The whole planet had gotten there first. Rejected.

Candidate 2: Logology. "The study of logos" — perfect for a knowledge blog, we thought. Except logology.co is an active paid logo-design service, and worse, logology is a real English word (the study of wordplay), which meant permanent search noise. Rejected.

Candidate 3: Logoarc. A blend with "archive." Logoarc.com turned out to be a logo design agency in Los Angeles — same name, same industry. The worst possible collision. Rejected.

Candidate 4: Logoarch. We tweaked the spelling and hit a different wall: LogoArchive, the internationally known project curating thousands of historical logos. Our name wasn't identical, but the concept overlapped so precisely that we'd look like a knockoff of a famous archive — in the exact field we wanted to build credibility in. And "arch" reads as architecture anyway. Rejected.

Candidate 5: Markiv. We changed direction — Mark + Archive. It felt right immediately. Then the search results came back... strange. Tanks. Iron Man suits. Lincoln automobiles. A Canadian marketing agency. A US real estate firm. The search engines were reading Markiv as "Mark IV" — the Roman numeral. A name ending in "IV" competes with every fourth-generation anything in human history. Rejected.

The one-letter miracle

Then we added a single letter — an e — and everything changed.

Markive. We searched again: no company, no service, no notable project in the logo or design space. The only traces were a twenty-year-old open-source tool and a street-art Facebook page with 101 likes. On the sixth try, we'd finally found clean ground.

That one letter did two jobs. It killed the "Mark IV" reading, and it completed the sound of "archive." The tail of Mark (-rk) flows into the tail of Archive (-ive) — a blend, the same way Instagram fused instant + telegram and Pinterest fused pin + interest. And the meaning wrote itself: archiving the marks of the world.

Five failures, three lessons. Every intuitive "Logo + something" combination in English is taken. A name's fate can turn on something absurdly small — in our case, one letter. And the scariest risk isn't getting sued; it's being buried. Nobody has to send a cease-and-desist to a blog that lives on page two of the search results.

The full story of what the name means lives on our About page.

How to verify a name before you commit

This is the checking order we settled into after six rounds. When a candidate survives your gut, run it through these five gates.

1. Plain web search. Search the name alone, then with your field attached ("Logolab", "Logolab logo design"). If page one shows an active service in your industry, walk away.

2. Check how search engines "read" it. The Markiv lesson: make sure engines don't interpret your name as something else entirely. If the top results are about a completely different topic, that's a red flag.

3. Domains and social handles. Even if you won't use them yet, confirm the domain (.com, or your country's TLD) and handles are free. Future-you will be grateful.

4. Pronunciation and spelling variants. Say it out loud. Check whether a same-sounding service exists — we found a Korean app pronounced identically to Markive, which is why we standardized on the English spelling as our primary mark.

5. Trademark search. Check your national trademark database (USPTO's search in the US; we also ran KIPRIS, Korea's registry). Ten minutes here can save you a rebrand later.

The MARKIVE checklist — 5 questions before you commit

1. Is an active service in your field already using this name?
2. Do search engines interpret the name as something else?
3. Can you secure the domain and social handles?
4. Any collisions in pronunciation or spelling variants?
5. Does the name carry a story? — When someone asks what it means, you should be able to answer in one sentence.

That fifth question might look odd on a due-diligence list, but for us it was the decisive one. A name, like a logo, is a vessel for a story — the same standard we hold every logo to in the MARKIVE 7.

Next in this series: giving the name a face. Part 2 covers the six drafts and one trademark check it took to arrive at our logo — including how an M that wanted to be a bookmark ended up hiding an exclamation point.

Read the logo, Markive!

이 글을 한국어로 보기