ARTICLE
31 July 2020

US Supreme Court Holds Booking.com A Distinctive And Registrable Trademark

PC
Pearl Cohen Zedek Latzer Baratz

Contributor

Pearl Cohen Zedek Latzer Baratz logo
Pearl Cohen is an international law firm with offices in Israel, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Our strength is derived from decades of legal experience and an intimate knowledge of the cutting edge technological, legal, and transactional issues facing our clients in local and cross border matters. This combination of experience and knowledge allows us to provide sound and innovative advice to clients worldwide.
The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the hotel reservation website Booking.com may register its name as a protected trademark.
United States Intellectual Property

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the hotel reservation website Booking.com may register its name as a protected trademark.

The hotel reservation company has been making worldwide use of the Booking.com trademark since 2006. It applied to register the trademark with the US Patent and Trademark Office (the "USPTO") in 2011. The USPTO denied the application, explaining that the mark is a generic name for hotel reservation services that could not be registered.

The US Lanham Act allows registration of trademarks only when a trademark is distinctive. Generic names cannot be registered as trademarks to prevent an unfair advantage to the trademark applicant.

In its decision, the court held that a "generic.com" term is considered generic for a class of goods or services only where it has that meaning for consumers. Since evidence shows that consumers do not see Booking.com as a generic name for any hotel reservation service, but rather identify it with a specific entity, the term is not generic in these particular circumstances. However, the court clarified the registered Booking.com mark will not yield its owner a monopoly on the term "booking". This would be a generic term for travel companies. Moreover, because that mark is one of many similarly worded marks, close variations of the mark may also be deemed non-infringing.

CLICK HERE to read the US Supreme Court's opinion in United States Patents and Trademark Office v. Booking.com

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More