by Mike Masnick
Tue, Jul 28th 2009 7:18pm
Eric Goldman points us to the news that Hotels.com has had the trademark application on its own name rejected (warning: pdf) as being too generic. I have to admit I'm really, really surprised about this. I would think that the combination of "hotels" with a ".com" on the end switches it from being generic to distinct, since there's only one hotels.com. However, the trademark board and the court note that there are lots of other sites that use a combination of hotels and .com, such as www.all-hotels.com, www.web-hotels.com, www.my-discount-hotels.com. That could be true, but I think those are all different enough themselves from the straight hotels.com that even getting a trademark on hotels.com alone shouldn't prohibit those other sites from existing. But that's not what the court found, noting that hotels.com itself was perfectly generic and unprotectable by trademark. It's not clear how much this would actually matter, since anyone else using the phrase will ultimately end up helping to advertise hotels.com itself. However, it does raise significant questions about trademarks on other generic words plus a .com at the end.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Why Is The Hotel Industry More Focused On Harming Airbnb Than Improving Their Own Product?
- Sufferin' Trademarks: The Trademark Dispute Over The Word Succotash
- EU Advocate General Declares That Hotels Don't Need To Pay Copyright License To Have In-Room Television
- Fine Brothers History Of Overaggressive Behavior Doomed Their Plan; But Hopefully Others Will Revive The Good Parts
- FCC Fines More Companies For Blocking Convention Center WiFi, Says Hilton Obstructed Investigation