Is It Possible to Get Trademark Protection for Cryptocurrency?

Cryptocurrency is differentiated by its own financial market, with corporations like Samsung and Facebook deciding to launch their own versions or types of Cryptocurrency to participate in this market. Nowadays, one of the most famous Cryptocurrencies in the world is BITCOIN; many people have been interested in this ground-breaking technology. Recently, Nike has obtained Trademark Registration in the United States for their Cryptocurrency, dubbed Crypto Sneakers. Blockchain Technology provides Cryptocurrency trades by permitting transactions to be performed in a secure, safeguarded ledger using a networked database structure protected by hashing power. Cryptocurrencies were introduced to replace some of the present currencies and fulfil identical financial tasks without requiring Government consent as legal currency. In this write-up, we are going to discuss how is it possible to get Trademark Protection for Cryptocurrency?

What do you mean by Cryptocurrency?

Before we discuss Trademark Protection for Cryptocurrency, let’s understand the meaning of Cryptocurrency. It is a type of virtual or digital money that uses cryptography for security & a decentralised ledger for transaction recording. It only exists in a virtual formal, unlike a real note issued by the Government. It is represented by a computer code that may be organised to include an extensive range of rights & duties to achieve activities beyond operating just as a means of payment or exchange. Cryptocurrency can also be used to enable digital access to a product, a service or an application, as well as to show actual world asset interests.

Additionally, unlike traditional currencies, BITCOIN is not distributed & generated centrally. Instead, it’s a network of computers that does computational work while keeping online transaction records. As an outcome, the newly minted coin gets rewarded.

Trademark Protection for Cryptocurrency – Is it Possible?

BitFlyer, Inc. had obtained Trademark Registration for the word “BITCOIN” for use as computer programmes employed in the area of electronic commerce transactions; electronic machines & apparatus; telecommunication machines & apparatus; computer programmes in 2016, but the USPTO (United States Patent & Trademark Office) had refused it. The word was only descriptive of the subject matter & specifics of the products or goods submitted by the owner or applicant, as per the USPTO. The USPTO also rejected an application for the Registration of BITCOIN word in 2018, claiming that the mark or word was merely descriptive of the subject matter & a characteristic of the owner or applicant’s services.

Moreover, in the USA, the work OMNICOIN was registered in Class 36 for Cryptocurrency^[1], namely, giving a digital currency for use by online communities through a worldwide computer network; Cryptocurrency, namely, a P2P digital currency, incorporating cryptographic protocols, operating over the internet, and used as a payment method for products & services; it, namely, a P2P online currency, incorporating cryptographic protocols, Cryptocurrency, primarily, a P2P digital currency, combining cryptographic protocols, running over the internet, and unlisted as a Payment form for products & services, as per Class 36.

In 2020, the SPTO or Spanish Patents & Trademark Office, like the United Kingdom, awarded Trademark Protection for Cryptocurrency (BITCOIN) salesperson involved in selling & buying BITCOIN. Such a grant of Trademark Rights for the word “BITCOIN” has been criticised across the globe because Blockchain & BITCOIN are based on open source technologies that anybody may use to provide Cryptocurrency services. The USA is most likely the 1^st nation to experience an upsurge in case laws concerning Trademark Law and Cryptocurrencies, especially since it starts enabling the BITCOIN names’ registration.

Trademark Infringement Case Between Alibaba Group Holding Limited vs Alibabacoin Foundation – Trademark Protection for Cryptocurrency

The petitioner Alibaba Group Holding Limited vs Alibabacoin Foundation, requested a preliminary injunction against the defendants for Trademark Infringement of its brand or Trademark Alibaba as a new Cryptocurrency, Alibabacoin. They also asked for a ban of the word Alibaba Coin to refer to their Cryptocurrency until the suit was resolved. The preliminary injunction was permitted by the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, and the defendants move to dismiss the lawsuit was declined. On the main claim of the defendant was that Alibaba had said that it would never involve in the Cryptocurrency sector and as an outcome, had surrendered its right to use its Cryptocurrency Trademark. The Court dismissed this dispute, nothing that “accepting this view of rejection would solidify American Trademark Law hugely effectively” and permitted Alibaba a preliminary injunction after determining that Alibaba had established a chance of success on the virtues of its Trademark Infringement claim. Moreover, the Court determined that the defendants used the word or mark in conjunction with their online business activities, specifying that the mark or word was used in commerce as a product or service.

What are the Drawbacks of not Obtaining Trademark Protection for Cryptocurrency?

The consequence of failing to attribute Trademark ownership might result in wings of problems stemming from the specious application of such technology. Consider the case of an internet user who is interested in Cryptocurrencies and wants to purchase it. After examining his or her options for purchasing BITCOINs, he or she decides to get them from an individual who is actively pushing the sale of currency while also operating as a falsified investor. Because of such Cryptocurrency is not held and safeguarded under the Trademark Law, the owner cannot prevent anybody acting in such a fake capacity from causing damage to the brand image of Cryptocurrency.

If the consumer fails to prevent such activities as mentioned above, they may incur unwarranted difficulties as an outcome of an absence of available remedies. Moreover, words like Blockchain and Bitcoin have grown in popularity, and it is simple to use identical terms for other products or services without infringing the law. As an outcome, it is vital to find out how to preserve Cryptocurrencies so that customers aren’t targeted by different Cryptocurrency providers & the approved reputations of providers are not tarnished.

As an outcome, attribution of combined authorship to owners in the form of collective marks is another option to single ownership over such technologies. The same would serve as a protection against customer deception while concurrently resolving the decentralised control dilemma. But, this is not a problem free way because validating actual ownership of Trademarks can be challenging.

Conclusion

Cryptocurrency has grown immensely in the last few years, granting people to send and receive that are not limited to a sole currency. Such technology has the capability to transform completely and modernise our economic operations. However, the world as a whole is still grappling with a slew of regulatory & legal problems surrounding BITCOIN.