Intel Suing More Companies For Trademark Infringement

from the gotta-keep-the-lawyers-busy dept

Fri, Nov 14th 2008 1:45am — Mike Masnick

Earlier this year, we mentioned that Intel was suing a travel agency for having the name Intellife Travel, despite the fact that trademark law is pretty clear that trademarks only cover specific areas of business, and Intel is not in the travel business. This wasn't the first time Intel had stretched trademark law, either. As we wrote last year, it was suing a jeans company as well. Law.com is running an article noting that Intel appears to have stepped up its trademark lawsuit campaign this year, filing 15 lawsuits already, including a recent one against Intellectric, an electrician in Southern California who has been using the name for years.

Intel, of course, claims it needs to sue to protect its name, but this is incorrect. It only needs to sue in clear cases of confusion or dilution. These names of companies in totally unrelated businesses (where there's no chance of confusion) are situations where there is no impact on Intel and they need not sue. There are some cases where it could make sense -- and I'll grant Intel's lawsuit against the research firm "Insider Intel" might make sense, given Intel's trademark on "Intel Inside," but many of these other lawsuits are ridiculous.

Yet, because many of the businesses are small, while Intel is huge, the businesses are forced to settle. Remember the travel agency? Rather than fight the lawsuit (which it almost certainly would have won), the company decided to settle, though it can't talk about the terms of the settlement.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: trademark
Companies: intel

17 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 14 Nov 2008 @ 2:32am

wtf?

next thing you know they will sue some one for commenting that an article they read was intelligent.

its companies like those that make me wish for some type of "open source" hardware (what ever the proper term maybe).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- giff, 14 Nov 2008 @ 7:25am
  
  Re:
  Actually, there are open source hardware solutions
  
  See for instance http://www.opensparc.net/
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 14 Nov 2008 @ 7:30am
    
    Re: Re:
    interesting stuff thx for the link.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 14 Nov 2008 @ 7:35am
    
    Re: Re:
    interesting stuff thx for the link.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Nov 2008 @ 3:44am

I'm sorry but you can no longer use the word INTELigent. It's now a trademark and copywrite infrigement. Please allow 7 to 10 days for your lawsuit to arrive by mail.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Liam Potter, 14 Nov 2008 @ 4:07am

how many people are still spelling copyright as copywrite?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Vincent Clement, 14 Nov 2008 @ 4:44am
  
  Re:
  The ones that can't spell intelligent correctly ;)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Greg, 14 Nov 2008 @ 5:25am
    
    Re: Re:
    Indeed. And most certainly they would incorrectly spell "misspell" as "mispell."
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Nov 2008 @ 4:57am

Look no further than Nissan.com for an example of this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
pferland, 14 Nov 2008 @ 6:04am

This is why I will never buy any Intel products
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Joe, 14 Nov 2008 @ 6:35am

Intel TM enforcement
It's worth noting that by far the most trademark enforcement actions that Intel brings is not in court but rather in the Trademark Office.

Go to and search for "intel" in the party search field. Aggressive enforcement? You bet. Is it justified? Hard to say until you're in the ring fighting counterfeiters. people who are clearly trying to make a buck on your brand and, yes, those borderline cases where a person's mark brings Intel to mind but but maybe sorta not in a confusing way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Joe, 14 Nov 2008 @ 6:36am
  
  Re: Intel TM enforcement
  http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
OC, 14 Nov 2008 @ 7:32am

So according to Intel, when I see the label "Intel inside" I should be worried that someone has stuffed a pair of jeans in my computer?!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Nov 2008 @ 8:47am

Military Intel?
So, does this mean the military pay a royalty or something when they go in for briefings where they talk about intel reports?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Nov 2008 @ 12:55pm

The new American Way - Where all other business fails, SUE SUE SUE!

Since the economy is at an all time low, these lawsuits continue to degrade it further, These people with these bullshit suits should be executed!

For the people! NOT THE CORPORATIONS!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Nov 2008 @ 10:47pm
  
  Re:
  For the children! Oh won't someone please spare a thought for those poor intelligent children?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
trademark, 19 Nov 2008 @ 7:35pm

Trademark madness
This is just one more example of "if you *can* sue, you *should* sue." Sigh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]