In 2002 Erich Specht was granted the a trademark on the term Android to use with his firm Android Data.
2004 Mr. Specht’s company went out of business and he lost his domain, androiddata.com.
Google applied to the US Patent and Trademark Office for a trademark on the term Android, but its application was rejected in 2008.
Google as we all know, went on to use the term in connection with its open mobile operating system.
Mr. Specht, filed a federal lawsuit on April 28, in Chicago, seeking “at least $2 million in damages” and a court order barring the use of the name.
Google’s Android software has been used in phones sold by T-Mobile USA Inc., Germany based Deutsche Telekom AG, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co. L.G. Electronics Inc., and Motorola Inc. have said they’ll introduce Android phones this year.
Each of those companies are identified in Specht’s complaint, Specht v. Google Inc., 09cv02572, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois (Chicago) as members of Google’s Open Handset Alliance, which is also named as a defendant in the case.
Google’s actions and its business partners that will use its software “will undoubtedly lead to deception, confusion and mistake among the consuming public,” according to Specht’s complaint.
“We believe these claims to be without merit,” Andrew Pederson, a Google spokesman, said today in a phone interview. “We will defend against them vigorously.”
The domain Andrioddata.com is currently owned as follows, and resolves to a Domain Sponsor parked page :
androiddata.com:
P.O. Box 335
Madisonville, Louisiana 70447 US
Administrative contact:
Technical contact:
Billing contact:
Dana Daste
dcdaste@aol.com
P.O. Box 335
Madisonville, Louisiana 70447 US
Phone: +1.9858451040
Fax:
Record dates:
Record created on: 2007-05-09 18:38:33 UTC
Record modified on: 2009-04-27 19:52:18 UTC
Record expires on: 2010-05-09 UTC
DS says
This is essentially a case in point against U.S. trademark laws. It usually goes the other way around, with big companies suing little guys to keep their pseudo “brand name” in tact. But we all know it is to fear monger the masses from competing. You can trademark basically anything, and people are starting businesses creating just trademarks to create future lawsuits against bigger companies.
When you don’t actually have a service, but said hey I thought of that name first. It is sort of just plain stupid. Asprin used to be a trademark, but then turned in to a generic term that other TM holders use on their bottles of pain relievers.
It is one thing to say “Hey stop using my name.” But it is another to sue for $2 million as if you feel that you would have made that much cash, or hurt your feelings that bad. It’s simply just phishing for money, and all monetary threats should be outlawed in the direct interests of TM disputes.
Drew says
Ah DS.
Let he who is without sin….
Swapnames.com
“Domain Fest”
Cough. Hack.
Do I get a prize for Pot Kettle?