Intellectual Property Law

Use of Unoriginal Trademarks Risks Confusing Consumers

By Michael Atkins

Dueling USA Networks: the Christian channel I found on vacation (top) 
and the well-known one owned by NBC Universal

I’m back from vacation.

I must say, I didn’t think much about trademark law while I was gone. One of the few times was when I came across a channel called “USA Network” on my hotel TV. I had expected to find edited-for-basic-cable movies and shows like “Monk” that are on the USA Network I get as part of my cable TV package at home. Not so. I instead found what appeared to be a channel offering 24-hour Christian content.

Hmmm. The marks are identical — USA NETWORK— and the services are identical — television services. So are these channels somehow related? I don’t think so, but I can’t tell. I guess you could say that I am confused.

Assuming the marks are not owned by NBC Universal, Inc. (which owns the USA Network I get at home), it may be that USA NETWORK is such a weak (if not downright generic) trademark when used in connection with television services that NBC Universal can’t stop lesser-known competitors from using the identical mark for identical services. If that’s the case, it’s not much of a trademark, is it?

Another possibility is that NBC Universal owns the Christian channel I came across. If that’s the case, NBC Universal is confusing viewers and watering down its own brand. That wouldn’t seem terribly smart.

One lesson to take from this is that a company adopts a weak trademark at its own peril. Why pour money into promoting a mark that you can’t protect? And if you have a protectable mark, don’t weaken it by associating it with incongruous goods or services. Doing so will only confuse consumers. Like me.

Full post as published by Seattle Trademark Lawyer on February 08, 2009 (boomark / email).