VC-backed company just killed my EU trademark for a small OSS project

854 points by _rkcg ↗ HN
I run a small open-source project [name-redacted] (Trademark [number-redacted]) I've been building for many years. It's not huge, just a few thousand users compared to the big OSS names, but to me it was worth protecting, so I trademarked the name in the EU and US a few years back. I had hoped to be protected from other corporations this way and live peacefully.

A $160M-funded company named [name-redacted] (Trademark [number-redacted]) came along and filed for cancellation at EUIPO since they needed the trademark now after getting lots of funding. They won. Now my trademark is gone.

The frustrating part? The EU actually does allow open-source (even free projects) to have trademarks, but you have to prove "genuine use" in the EU for the goods/services your trademark covers. Which seems to force you in collecting user sensitive data otherwise you are entirely unable to prove that you have actual users in the EU. I generally try to collect as little information as possible (also because I don't care where my users are coming from). I had google analytics running for some time on the main page (not documentation), but most of the time it didn't work and it seems most of my users block it anyway.

Here's what I gave the EUIPO and why they said no:

- Google Analytics for my site with a full country breakdown from 2018–2023. A few hundred to ~1,800 EU visitors per year per country. They said that’s "too small" to count as real commercial exploitation for my Class 9 software. Also, they said they couldn’t tell which goods those visits were actually for.

- npmjs + GitHub stats - hundreds of thousands of downloads and thousands of stars. Rejected because there's no location data, so they couldn't confirm if the usage was in the EU. In some cases, they said the timeframes weren't even clear.

- They basically kept repeating that they couldn't clearly link any of the usage to the specific goods/services my trademark was registered for.

The conclusion:

>Conclusion: It follows from the above that the EUTM proprietor has not proven genuine use of the contested mark for any of the goods and services for which it is registered. As a result, the application for revocation is wholly successful and the contested European Union trade mark must be revoked in its entirety. According to Article 62(1) EUTMR, the revocation will take effect from the date of the application for revocation, that is, as of 18/03/2024.

>COSTS: According to Article 109(1) EUTMR, the losing party in cancellation proceedings must bear fees and costs incurred by the other party.

They even admitted there's no strict minimum for usage, and free software can count, but in their eyes my EU traffic was too low and not clearly tied to the trademarked goods.

I also have the US trademark for the name. This same company tried to register in the US around 2022 (Trademark #79379273) and got blocked because it was too similar (decision made by USPTO). But a few months ago they somehow got it registered there too (Trademark #7789522), not sure how they did that now.

Now I'm sitting here wondering:

- Is it even worth getting a second opinion and appealing in the EU? I mean the project is very small.

- Should I fight the US registration?

- Or should I just walk away from trademarks altogether for my open-source projects. I lost so much money because of this already.

- And for OSS projects in general, is there even a practical, privacy-friendly way to prove EU usage without generating revenue?

- Is it even worth holding the trademark if proving EU usage is this brittle for OSS? If the trademark can be deleted just like that even after spending a few thousands dollars on lawyers. Probably a skill issue, but still, damn.

It sucks to lose the name I've been building for years to a corporation with $160M behind them, especially when this is just a side project I do in my spare time, and to them I'm a nobody. If nothing else, maybe my case ...

70 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 83.4 ms ] thread
IANAL, but I remember a case with a startup where 2 of the founders were lawyers. They found themselves in a similar situation & decided not to fight it, but to use it as an opportunity to rebrand

On the other hand, a startup with $160M may be willing to pay u for a US trademark w/o going to court or arbitration

(comment deleted)
> On the other hand, a startup with $160M may be willing to pay u for a US trademark w/o going to court or arbitration

Not after this post, they're not. They've already got a US trademark, and if they simply Google it, and find this post, they're going to realize this person is never going to challenge them in a US court over it.

https://www.deepki.com/about/#certifications-awards

>Deepki holds the label BCorp certification, thereby strengthening its commitment towards its communities and stakeholders.

https://www.bcorporation.net/en-us/standards/complaints/

>B Lab will investigate material, credible, and specific claims against a current B Corp in one of the two following categories:

> 2. Breaches of the B Corp Community's core values as expressed in our Declaration of Interdependence.

https://www.bcorporation.net/en-us/certification/

>B CORP DECLARATION OF INTERDEPENDENCE

>As Certified B Corporations and leaders of this emerging economy, we believe:

> That we must be the change we seek in the world.

> That all business ought to be conducted as if people and place mattered.

> That, through their products, practices, and profits, businesses should aspire to do no harm and benefit all.

> To do so requires that we act with the understanding that we are each dependent upon another and thus responsible for each other and future generations.

Is it possible to report B corps not working in accordance with the principles?
I had always assumed this was one of those labels that you go away and buy for a large sum of money when you've been caught doing something bad
What would you do if random corp would come and try to hijack your open source identity?
Honestly just cut your losses and move on

Google Analytics is not something that's "trademark used for actual trade"

Is the big company being a jerk? 100% But then sign m again the project is self-described as a "small OSS project"

I can understand it being handled like that as it prevents "trademark squatting"

Trademarks mean nothing. A bigger company can always come along and bully you till you give it up. Just like what happened to Allen Pan and his Mythbusters trademark.
Don't forget the greatest enemy of both abusive companies and abusive government: the news media. And this definitely seems big enough for them.

See if you can "shop" around (start local) to see who's interested in publishing a story something along the lines of "The EU has declared war on small businesses. I'm being forced to pay thousands of euros because a brand-new company decided they wanted to steal my years-old project name."

The EU pushes heavily for consent for tracking, yet you need to track your users locations to keep your trademark, thus requiring that every company has to have a popup asking to track that data.
I saw on Reddit, that you already reached out to some people in the OSS space that might have the legal expertise. This actually seems like a very relevant case to me. If a trademark is granted to an open source project, it seems ridiculous to me to apply market based use criteria.

Tbh...use should already be satisfied by having a Github or website and using the registered name.

Keep us posted.

Trademarks are for commerce, no? If you had charged even a few customers would it have helped?

Now that they own the trademark you can't make money off of it but you don't have to give anything up - if you have the url and aren't charging anyone you can hold onto it.

> I dealt with this years ago - it would have been about $250K to challenge the trademark for something that I'd been using for a few years.

Walk away.

Life is too short for lawsuits.

This comes from someone who dated someone for three years who was in a lawsuit when I got to know them, and was still in a lawsuit when we split. It affected them daily, hundreds and hundreds of hours were lost, thousands and thousands of dollars went to a nice, well-intended family lawyer.

But the best advice they could have got:

When given the chance, walk away.

Life is too short for lawsuits.

My own family has been involved in an ongoing series of lawsuits against each other since 1989. Over an amount of money that is long since gone and they've kicked in even more in lawyers fighting over. None of us talk to each other anymore.

This is the best advice you can get.

The more general principle is that people are too willing to adopt an adversarial mindset. In principle, there's a mutual win here if the VC company makes a substantial donation to the OSS product in exchange for the OSS project changing its name. Both parties will be better off in that scenario, relative to the lawsuit scenario.
I am sorry to hear that OP, I hope you fight the good fight and wish you all the best.

On a different note, a quick cursory glance of this company really makes me wonder who even gave them $160M? The company site is soulless and filled with corporate jargon, and the whole company smells of bloat and leadership team is a long list of people in bullshit jobs. Is this where VC money goes these days? I am dumbfounded by the degree of mismatch between capital and utility

It's fairly unusual for FLOSS projects to register any trademark, and (despite this lack of strict IP protection) it's also very unusual for the owner of a trademark to ask or require a FLOSS project to change their name because it violates a trademark. Not completely unheard of, but still rare.

I don't know why you decided to trademark your project name, but I think the biggest issue here is that trademark law is naturally the domain of IP rightsholders and an outlook that presumes and enforces scarcity when it comes to names, name spaces, and digital content.

There aren't that many reasons why FLOSS projects need to work within that same domain. My thought is that it is better to try and defend the environment of a digital commons that exists outside of them, than to enter into it and try to participate in a quite alien system of existing IP law, which has a lot of presumptions and standards that, as you say, don't really match the world you work within.

(comment deleted)
I guess you’ve fallen foul of the rules to protect against trademark “squatting”. They surely weren’t designed with (non-commercial) OSS projects in mind.
You can also write to FSFE about it, afaik they give legal advice in foss cases.
Rename your project, and use your established SEO of the trademark to tell the your story. You aren't going to win, but at least make them lose a bit too.
Looks like you submitted opposition to their new registration (Deepki) and then they retaliated by applying for cancellation to your existing mark (Deepkit)?

are they actually pursuing use of "Deepkit" or possibly did you just piss them off? Either way, I wouldn't expect to win anything going up these majors. Also, isn't clear there's any tangible benefit even if you were to win appeal.

Did you come first in time before the Deepki company? If so you probably have the ability to win. First in time wins, even if you were a small player. It would be their responsibility not to choose a project with a similar name to what you have if you came first.
(comment deleted)
>> the losing party in cancellation proceedings must bear fees and costs incurred by the other party.

What order of magnitude are those, if you are at liberty to say?

I haven't seen anything that mentions that trademarks are business classification specific. See Apple Corporation (the computer company) vs. Apple Corp (The Beatles holding company) for example.

Deepki is in a very different space to Deepkit (Although the former is a terrible brand name, and the latter sounds more related to deep learning).

Does an OSS project that doesn't trade have a classification? I have no idea.

You could have tried to offer to sell it to them? I dont think you can win it, no point burning a hole in your pocket