In yet another David vs. Goliath legal battle, online travel-planning startup Pintrips filed a motion earlier this month to dismiss a case brought against it last October by social bookmarking site Pinterest. Pinterest claims it has monopoly rights on certain contextual uses of the word “pin” online, and says that the defendant has been encroaching on that monopoly by utilizing the term on some of the pages of its site. Pintrips, in turn, is now fighting back, asserting that the word “pin” is too generic to be claimed solely by one entity, and is fair game for anyone to use. As one means of support for its argument, Pintrips lists numerous other major companies that use the “pin” term in various places within their products, without incurring the wrath of Pinterest. Besides, claims Pintrips, they are a price-comparison tool, and “not a social media platform” in the business of sharing visual images, which differentiates them even more from Pinterest. Furthermore, a court in Europe recently found that Pinterest doesn’t even hold the trademark for its own name—London startup Premium Interest claimed it first. Thus, Pinterest seems to be on rather shaky ground lately, when it comes to the strength of its brand.The main theme of Pintrips’ appeal appears to be an accusation that “specious claims” are being relied upon to strong-arm a “hard-working startup” as a result of Pinterest’s presumed frustration at not having done their due diligence at the outset to register the marks of some of their key terms. Pinterest, however, claims that it has successfully applied for registration of the “pin” mark (though, they have yet to register it), and that the burden of proof now lies in the hands of the defendant to provide evidence that the term is already used so ubiquitously elsewhere, so as to be considered “generic.” Pinterest has won six previous trademark infringement cases related to attempted registrations using the “pin” prefix, so perhaps they are cautiously optimistic about prevailing in this case, as well.
Considering the potentially daunting legal fees looming for small startup Pintrips, and the threat of losing ground on the branding front for heavily venture-funded Pinterest (not to mention taking a big hit when it comes to their market valuation and any IPO hopes they’ve been harboring), both sides have something to lose here. As a rule, judges’ decisions on cases such as these tend to involve highly subjective interpretation, particularly when it’s difficult to determine or prove whether there exists any actual consumer confusion between two similar marks, or whether the defendant intended to ride the coattails of the plaintiff’s brand or not. Given this subjectivity, the fate of this case may even ride on whether or not the judge (or eventual jury) is familiar with either or both of the sites in question. With the “pin” term currently being used freely in other, more high-profile contexts both online and offline, it will be interesting to see whether this turns out to be a fight well-picked for the social bulletin board–sharing site…or whether the motion to dismiss is granted, nipping this case in the bud.
Considering the potentially daunting legal fees looming for small startup Pintrips, and the threat of losing ground on the branding front for heavily venture-funded Pinterest (not to mention taking a big hit when it comes to their market valuation and any IPO hopes they’ve been harboring), both sides have something to lose here. As a rule, judges’ decisions on cases such as these tend to involve highly subjective interpretation, particularly when it’s difficult to determine or prove whether there exists any actual consumer confusion between two similar marks, or whether the defendant intended to ride the coattails of the plaintiff’s brand or not. Given this subjectivity, the fate of this case may even ride on whether or not the judge (or eventual jury) is familiar with either or both of the sites in question. With the “pin” term currently being used freely in other, more high-profile contexts both online and offline, it will be interesting to see whether this turns out to be a fight well-picked for the social bulletin board–sharing site…or whether the motion to dismiss is granted, nipping this case in the bud.