Slashdot Mirror


Gmail Under Trademark Dispute

fbform writes "As reported by this article on InternetNews, when news about Google's IPO broke on March 31, 2004, some companies (Cencourse, Precision Research and ProNet Analytics) made a beeline for the USPTO to get Gmail trademarked in their name, as Google's IPO prospectus said that its unregistered trademarks included Gmail. Google itself was fourth in line, and it was followed by the Gospel Music Association. This might be a very sticky issue because USPTO Trademark Administrator Sharon Marsh says 'The application process is first come, first served. Applications are processed as they're received, and the person second in line will get a refusal of registration from our examiner.' All of which means that between Google's delay in applying for the trademark, the other organizations' attempt at what can only be called cybersquatting, and the USPTO's bureaucracy, Google could well be denied the use of Gmail as a trademark."

23 of 273 comments (clear)

  1. anonymous coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    change it to @google.com?

    1. Re:anonymous coward by DJayC · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's the domain that their employees use. It wouldn't make sense to offer email accounts that their employees have. Google isn't a mail service, gmail is. I really doubt the people over at google want to start throwing out @google.com email addresses. It's like @hotmail.com getting changed to @microsoft.com.

    2. Re:anonymous coward by luferbu · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not really, corporate Yahoo! mail is @yahoo-inc.com.

  2. Uh... it's pretty much Google's fault by SilentChris · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Geek fandom aside, you don't launch a product (even a beta) and not grab the name. What did they *think* would happen?

    *Scratches head* I'm not going to go as far as some press has gone and say Google's been botching the IPO, but one wonders: how are they a good investment option if they can't even get basic business procedures right?

    1. Re:Uh... it's pretty much Google's fault by GoofyBoy · · Score: 4, Informative

      From the article;

      IIIR's Gmail is a service for subscribing clients, including securities traders, bankers, hedge fund brokers and retail investors.

      "My firm has operated a service of similar name since May 2002, which is also a Web-based e-mail service," Smith said. ...

      Under that criterion, Precision Research would win the trademark, claiming its used Gmail since January 1998. The Gospel Music Association would be next in line, thanks to its having sent members its Gmail e-mail newsletter since 1999.

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  3. Easy Solution! by blue_adept · · Score: 4, Funny

    rename G-mail to G-spot. Fits in nicely with their new playboy image as well. ;)

    --

    "Is this just useless, or is it expensive as well?"
  4. Cybersquatting? by Daniel+Boisvert · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is it still called cybersquatting when the other companies have been using the name for *years* already? One has been using it since 1998, fer cryin' out loud.

    Granted, I'd consider it a bit fishy that they only now bothered to trademark it (unless they were concerned that Google would force them to change), but they do have a legitimate claim to the name.

    1. Re:Cybersquatting? by maverick215 · · Score: 4, Informative

      a quick search of the gospel music place turns up this link
      http://www.gospelmusic.org/news/GMAil_topsto ry_07- 10-03.cfm
      10 july 03
      apparently they've been mailing their Gospel mail (gmail) for several years (supposedly since 1999)

    2. Re:Cybersquatting? by servoled · · Score: 3, Informative

      Cencourse: Global Mail
      Precision Research: ???
      Pronet Analytics: G-Mail technology discussed here
      Gospel Music: GMail

      --
      "I have a porkchop, you have a porkchop. I have a veal, you have a veal".
  5. Gotta love the unbiased reporting on slashdot by Jason1729 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All of which means that between Google's delay in applying for the trademark, the other organizations' attempt at what can only be called cybersquatting, and the USPTO's bureaucracy, Google could well be denied the use of Gmail as a trademark

    Now if we replaced Google with Microsoft and gmail with hotmail, we'd all be critisizing MS for stomping on the rights of these poor little companies and non-profits.

  6. This seems epidemic at Google by maelstrom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I interviewed with them and from what i could tell they are seriously screwed up. Apparently while I was in the air flying out there (on the reservations _THEY_ made), they called my apartment leaving a message trying to cancel.

    I show up to the hotel and there is no reservation for me, so I'm forced to pay $200 out of pocket (not cheap for a college student). After the interview, there was a series of hijinx which I will not go into here. I had to send them a reminder e-mail to reimburse me for the hotel room. Then several months later I get a note from one of their financial departments asking me to fill out a survey so they could better get to know their "suppliers".

    They were so screwed up they somehow thought I was a contractor or other service provider. How can a company not even know where and why their money is going? This incident, combined with some of the recent news doesn't give me a lot of hope for that company.

    Let's see, Orkut privacy violations, accusations that Orkut is stolen IP, "forgetting" they gave 28 million shares to employees and contractors, apparently violating SEC quiet registration period, "forgetting" to trademark Gmail, and so on.

    I used to love Google like every other techie, but I've been seriously disillusioned. It won't take much for me to switch my preferences to another engine.

    --
    The more you know, the less you understand.
    1. Re:This seems epidemic at Google by rs79 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Then several months later I get a note from one of their financial departments asking me to fill out a survey so they could better get to know their "suppliers".

      So send them an invoice.

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
  7. It's not who registers first by Ivan+Karamazov · · Score: 5, Informative

    Legally, it's not who registers the trademark first, but who uses the trademark first. It also matters if they are in the same market. It's possible that they could all get the gmail trademark if they are all in completely different markets. For Google to be in trouble, one of these other companies would have had to actually use the gmail name to provide Internet services or email services before Google. If one of the other companies get gmail registered as a trademark, Google can still use gmail, get sued by the other company, and then as a defense, challenge the validity of the other company's registered trademark. I bet Google's attorney's are not worried.

    --
    "The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy." Albert Camus,
  8. MINE MINE MINE by Crashmarik · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anyone else notice the similarity between the way the legal profession operates and the way 2 year olds behave

  9. The usages are different by optimus2861 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Note in the article that what each word is using "Gmail" to refer to are slightly different. That may allow enough wiggle room for the USPTO to sort everything out. For instance:

    Google wants it to offer a general-purpose web-based email service to the general public.

    The investment firm uses it as a subscription-based mailing list for traders, bankers, brokers, etc.

    The Gospel Music Association uses it to refer to their newsletter.

    The fourth firm, it doesn't say specifically, only that it's involved in high-tech equipment design.

    Remember that a trademark only protects your mark in your specific line of business; it doesn't give you the undisputed use of the name in all arenas. Not that it stops the big companies from trying to throw their weight around, mind you (Like Nissan)

  10. Tried and True by Mr_Blank · · Score: 3, Insightful

    News stories like this and this shut down any errant ideas I might have had over investing in the Google IPO. The company is brilliant and definitely a market leader. But the company has not yet shown that it can run itself as a publically traded company. They have no track record. They have made a few early blunders.

    If you want to be successful do what succesful people do. In investing, try Warren Buffet: He invests in undervalued companies with good potential for growth. Undervalued typically requires underhyped. Google has potential for growth but is definitely overhyped. Only a fool invests at the peak and Google's IPO is definitely an overhyped peak.

    Just my 2 cents - - which will be invested in not-Google by the way.

  11. Trademark Law by LawGeek · · Score: 5, Informative

    This article is pretty much devoid of any proper legal analysis. Usually they hunt up a practicing lawyer to offer some consultation on the issues involved, but this article didn't seem to have that. They did have a PTO person say some basic things, but the story does not end there, as any seasoned TM lawyer can tell you.

    Yes, trademark REGISTRATION in the U.S. is first come, first served, but trademark rights are ultimately only gained by using the mark in interstate commerce. Getting a trademark registration will get you a PRESUMPTION that you were using on the date of your application filing, but if you go to court, you must ultimately show that you were using the mark in question in interstate commerce.

    Further, even the registration process accounts for this requirement. Here's how. Company A files an application for GMAIL on Jan. 31. Google, who had been using their GMAIL mark since Jan. 1, only gets around to filing an application on Feb. 1. Now, when the USPTO gets Google's application, they'll do a search, find Company A's application, and likely suspend Google's application until Company A's application is either registered or rejected (an application can be rejected for any number of reasons).

    Now, let's say Company A gets to the point where the USPTO is ready approve their application for registration. Before registration can happen, the mark must go through a process called "publication," where the mark is advertised by the USPTO and third parties have a certain time period to contest registration of the mark. One of the grounds for opposing is earlier use. Google could certainly lodge an opposition and, if they could show that they were using the GMAIL mark earlier than Company A, they would likely prevail.

    Even if Google is asleep at the switch, and Company A's mark registers, they can do the equivalent of opposing it after registration through a process called cancellation. Same basic rules, same basic result. If Google was using first, then they will likely prevail.

  12. Check out the Wayback Machine by fname · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Looks like gmail.com has been through a bunch of iterations. Not sure how on topic this is, but it's interesting to see the different sorts of things that the domain has been used for.

    1. Re:Check out the Wayback Machine by Troed · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I find it highly interesting in this case that a company actually offered "life time" @gmail.com email adresses in -96 ...

      Your LIFETIME Email address!

  13. Re:I'm confused about this by iamdrscience · · Score: 3, Informative

    The name of the office is abberviated USPTO for a reason, it stands for United States Patent and Trademark Office. To register national trademarks you have to go through the USPTO. If you only need a regional trademark, you would do it as you said.

  14. Re:This is easy. by elucubra · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, trademark GoogleMail, whose domain is gmail.com. Since when does a trademark automatically give you ownership of a domain, especially if you had it before the trademark?

    Also, is there not a provision to prevent "reverse cybersquatting" with a trademark? I would think no judge would have any doubts.

  15. Re:Denied... by DAldredge · · Score: 3, Insightful

    THE OTHER COMPANIES WHERE USING THE NAME GMAIL FIRST. It's in the damn artice, why don't you try reading it.

    My God, I miss the old /. when at least some of the posters had IQs that didn't have a negative sign in front of them!

  16. Re:Pretty redulous... by Guppy06 · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Gmail is so wide spread, how can they not get the trademark? And fp?"

    That's exactly the problem: Google didn't get fp at the USPTO.