Addressing a petition for cancellation of the GMail trademark in the US, Google responded to the US Patent and Trademark Office that International Independent Investment Research's application for the trademark was invalid from the beginning.
In January, Britain-based ab initio," or from inception.
Google trademark attorneys James L. Vana and Matthew D. Schneller also argue that IIIR falsely stated that it had "a bona fide intention to use the G-Mail mark in the United States.
"Since each of these applications are invalid," said Google, "Petitioners do not have standing to challenge the Registration on those bases."
In a regulatory filing with the British government, IIIR mentions the ongoing dispute with Google, calling the company's stance on intellectual property "indefensible."
From that filing:
Meanwhile regarding the ongoing dispute with Google over its use of the Gmail mark, for which the Group has prior pending trademark applications, the Board notes that its criticism of Google's use of third-party intellectual property is now being echoed by much larger software, technology and media companies such as Microsoft, Viacom and CBS.
Microsoft General Counsel Thomas Rubin, in particular, has accused Google of "systematic copyright violation".The Group increasingly believes that Google's stance on intellectual property is indefensible and expects to announce shortly an initiative to raise the profile - with investors, advertisers, users and regulators - of Google's approach to intellectual property. The Group re-iterates its commitment to protect Group intellectual property.
Commentators on the
Another commentator, claiming to be an IIR shareholder, echoes the company's complaints in the regulatory filing:
"I think we are doing the right thing protecting our IP from a company that has no regard for TM rights. As a public company they are simply doing what is best for their shareholders which is there responsibility at the end of the day."
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!