ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Trademark Law Blogs -> Las Vegas Trademark Attorney

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Trademark Law

: Las Vegas Trademark Attorney

Intel Files Opposition Against INTELLEQUITY service mark application

By Ryan Gile

ADVERTISEMENTS


A New Jersey company named Business Development Partners, LLC (?BDP?) is seeking to register the mark INTELLEQUITY for ?consulting services in the field of managing intellectual properties.?

On July 23, 2008, however, Intel Corporation (?Intel?) filed a Notice of Opposition against BDP arguing that registration should be denied because the mark is likely to cause confusion with and/or dilution of Intel?s famous family of INTEL marks. See Intel Corporation v. Business Development Partners, LLC, Opposition No. 91185394 (T.T.A.B. Filed July 23, 2008).

The crux of the likelihood of confusion argument comes down to this: ?The marks INTELLEQUITY and INTEL share the first five letters such that the first two syllables of both marks are pronounced exactly the same.? So, what Intel seems to be arguing is that no one else can ever register a trademark or service mark that begins with a suggestive reference to the word ?Intellectual? (because any such mark will naturally begin with ?intel-?) even if the mark is used on services different from anything in which Intel involved ? unless Intel has branched out into the business of consulting on how to manage IP portfolios).

As for dilution, there is no doubt that the INTEL mark is famous. However, I think there is a serious question as to whether the similarity between the INTELLEQUITY mark and the INTEL mark which gives rise to an association between the marks that impairs the distinctiveness of the Intel mark. If anything, most consumers seeing the INTELLEQUITY mark would see it as suggestive of the Intellectual Property services being offered ? a unitary composite mark joining the first part of the word Intellectual with the word Equity which makes one think of monetary value of property.

It will be interesting to see if BDP opts to fight this battle. While I think the chances of success for BDP are good, it may cost a good deal of money in legal fees in order to mount a fight against a behemoth like Intel. And since the application was filed as a Section 1(b) intent-to-use application, the cheaper route may just be to switch to another name ? although I hope they don?t because I personally think it?s actually a pretty good name for the services they intend to offer.

Does Intel have any plans for filing a cybersquatting action against the owners of http://www.intellequity.com.

Full post as published by Las Vegas Trademark Attorney on July 24, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0021 secs (from cache 10/31/26 10:54:52)