Google’s Gmail email service may become the subject of a trade mark lawsuit, according to UK research firm Independent International Investment Research PLC (IIR), which has been running its own private G-Mail service since May 2002.
IIR has been negotiating with the search engine since Google launched Gmail in April 2004, arguing that it has a prior claim to the mark. Both firms have submitted trade mark applications, but the Patent and Trademark offices in both the US and UK have yet to approve either application.
The firm says that a report on the trade mark last year valued its worth at between £25 million and £34 million.
According to IIR, negotiations with Google have now broken down, and it is considering further legal action. Speaking to CNET News.com, IIR chief executive Shane Smith revealed that the company might commence proceedings alongside a German firm with a similar claim on the Gmail name.
Giersch Ventures has already won a temporary court injunction against Google, which was ordered to change the name of its Gmail service in Germany, at least until the case comes to trial.
"We think Google is a good company with good products, but we have a pre-existing right to this name,” Smith told CNET. "On the grounds of it (being) in the interest of our shareholders, we have to defend that right".
The announcement came shortly before Google learned the result of an ongoing action brought against it by Microsoft. The software giant sued Google in July after former executive Kai-Fu Lee left Microsoft to head up Google’s new product research and development centre in China.
According to yesterday’s ruling by Judge Steven Gonzales:
“Google’s use of Dr Lee to engage in recruiting activities relating to Google’s planned research and development facility in China, pending trial, including establishing facilities, hiring engineers and administration staff, interacting with public officials regarding the facilities and recruitment, meeting with universities and administrators regarding recruitment and offering general non-technical advice to Google about doing business in China, does not violate the Agreement [restrictive covenant between Microsoft and Dr Lee] provided Dr Lee does not recruit from Microsoft or use any confidential information from Microsoft”.
Both sides claimed victory in the case, which, according to Microsoft, restricts Dr Lee to limited interviewing and site location activities.
Nicole Wong, Associate General Counsel for Google, on the other hand, claimed in a blog, “There are some restrictions, but the ruling basically allows Dr Lee to do what we've wanted him to be able to do.”
