Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com B. V.
View Official PDFSummary
A short, plain-English overview of Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com B. V..
The Supreme Court decided that the term 'Booking.com' is not generic and is eligible for federal trademark registration. The Court found that the term is not perceived by consumers as a generic name for online hotel-reservation services. The decision affirms the lower courts' findings and rejects the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's argument for a rule that combining a generic term with '.com' results in a generic composite.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com B. V..
The Court held that a term styled 'generic.com' is a generic name for a class of goods or services only if the term has that meaning to consumers.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Patent and Trademark Office v. Booking.com B. V. that support the summary and concepts above.
A term styled 'generic.com' is a generic name for a class of goods or services only if the term has that meaning to consumers.
The PTO's proposed rule does not follow from Goodyear's India Rubber Glove Mfg. Co. v. Goodyear Rubber Co.
The generic (or nongeneric) character of a particular term depends on its meaning to consumers.
