What to do when your startup gets sued by a big player
We wanted to bring online games to the real world and we did everything the right way. We brought together a talented team of developers and marketers, as well as individuals with years of experience in real estate development. We built a business plan. We found office space, which we shared to save costs. We secured our first round of investment. And we spent countless hours developing the game - all while legally dotting all of our i’s and crossing all of our t’s along the way. We were starting to see all of our efforts paying off.
Then, we got sued by Square, Inc. – the payment processing company. It turns out we were not the only victims. Square, Inc. also sued other startups with the word “square” in their names. Apparently, Square, Inc. feels that it has the monopoly on the word “square,” and it doesn’t matter that there’s no likelihood of confusion (to use the trademark parlance) between our real-life virtual game and Square Inc.’s payment processing business. It’s only a matter of time before Square, Inc. insists that Moscow’s Red Square or Beijing’s Tiananmen Square change their names.
What are we going to do?
We’re moving forward. We just launched our new version and our developers are pushing hard to make new features the next month. We feel we’ve invested a lot in our name and our brand, and we’re not backing down just because a larger company feels it can bully startups into submission.
This is a very realistic issue that many startups and founders may face. We are going to fight it and believe our startup will survive, because we do it for the love of the game.
We encourage all startups and founders to follow their passion and persevere in the face of adversity.
Boris Co-Founder, Cashsquare
Edit: Holy crap. They've filed a TON of trademarks in a ton of different categories. How have they gotten all of these? You technically can't use Square in the name of anything dealing with a computer.
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4809:16h...
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4809:16h...
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4809:16h...
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4809:16h...
Just a few of them...
BTW, someone was granted "CodeSquare" trademark before those. Also FourSquare was before those and covers much of the same legal wording. I doubt they have a strong case against you, but IANAL. The fact that you use the word "Cash" and they have multiple trademarks in the financial and computer payment space may hurt your case though.
It gets more ridiculous... CodeSquare was granted a trademark in the Goods and Services IC 042. US 100 101. G & S and then 2 years later, Square comes along and trademarks "Square" in the exact same Goods and Services IC 042. US 100 101. G & S. I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like there is a contradiction. At the very least, as a layman, it looks like some underhanded lawyer-ing that they are now using offensively.
Lastly, Square (Aka Square Enix, the video game company) also has the trademark "Square" and also is in Goods and Services IC 042. US 100 101. G & S. So two companies own the "Square" trademark within a single category. I have no idea how any of this actually works out in law, but the fact that there is so much complexity and ambiguity is startling to me.
The best defense when a big company attacks a smaller company is to take the fight to the press. America loves the little guy. It goes back to the colonies and the Redcoats. It’s in our D.N.A. http://boss.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/03/defending-david-aga...
IANAL, but ... Trademarks are one of those things where if you don't show evidence of fighting misuse, you can lose the trademark. This force makes lawyers and in-house counsel write these letters.
I do have to say that even though you are not a competitor of Square, the name cashsquare is a little confusing. With no other context, I would have thought it was related. Given trademark law and this name, it seems reasonable that you'd receive a letter.
Or better yet, FourSquare. Square has a trademark[0] on using "Square" when describing "computer software for determining and mapping the physical locations of consumers;", yet they were given the trademark, even though there could be clear confusion, based on the legal wording.
The obvious answer is that Square has lawyers that found all the possible ways they could trademark the word "Square", even if the connection is highly suspect. Now they are using it to take down companies that cannot afford to defend themselves.
[0]http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4809:16h...
My advice was specific and achieves the goal of not going bankrupt for a startup. I have been through lawsuits before and I know how expensive and distracting they can be.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvlTJrNJ5lA
Go contact a proper lawyer for more information on what to do legally.
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4808:lt2...
http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4809:16h...