• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

McCarter & English Logo

  • People
  • Services
  • Insights
  • Our Firm
    • Leadership Team
    • Social Justice
    • Diversity, Equity & Inclusion
    • Pro Bono
    • Client Service Values
    • Alumni
  • Join Us
    • Lawyers
    • Summer Associates
    • Patent Professionals
    • Professional Staff
    • Job Openings
  • Locations
    • Boston
    • Philadelphia
    • East Brunswick
    • Indianapolis
    • Stamford
    • Hartford
    • Trenton
    • Miami
    • Washington, DC
    • New York
    • Wilmington
    • Newark
  • Share

Share

Browse Alphabetically:

  • A
  • B
  • C
  • D
  • E
  • F
  • G
  • H
  • I
  • J
  • K
  • L
  • M
  • N
  • O
  • P
  • Q
  • R
  • S
  • T
  • U
  • V
  • W
  • X
  • Y
  • Z
  • All
Bankruptcy, Restructuring & Litigation
Blockchain, Smart Contracts & Digital Currencies
Business Litigation
Cannabis
Coronavirus Resource Center
Corporate
Crisis Management
Cybersecurity & Data Privacy
Delaware Corporate, LLC & Partnership Law
Design, Fashion & Luxury
E-Discovery & Records Management
Energy & Utilities
Environment & Energy
Financial Institutions
Food & Beverage
Government Affairs
Government Contracts & Global Trade
Government Investigations & White Collar Defense
Healthcare
Hospitality
Immigration
Impact Investing
Insurance Recovery, Litigation & Counseling
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Life Sciences
Manufacturing
Products Liability, Mass Torts & Consumer Class Actions
Public Finance
Real Estate
Renewable Energy
Sports & Entertainment
Tax & Employee Benefits
Technology Transactions
Transportation, Logistics & Supply Chain Management
Trusts, Estates & Private Clients
Venture Capital & Emerging Growth Companies
  • Broadcasts
  • Events
  • News
  • Publications
  • View All Insights
Search By:
Media item displaying Book It: Supreme Court Holds Booking.com Is Registrable as a Trademark
Main image for Book It: Supreme Court Holds Booking.com Is Registrable as a Trademark
Publications|Alert

Book It: Supreme Court Holds Booking.com Is Registrable as a Trademark

Intellectual Property Alert

6.30.2020

How appropriate that the first-ever Supreme Court case to consider whether trademarks used on the internet can be registered should also be the first in which oral argument was conducted remotely. The issue in this historic case is whether Booking.com, the travel reservations website, is entitled to a federal trademark registration for “Booking.com.”

A generic term stands for a class of goods or services, rather than the source of those goods or services, and is never entitled to trademark protection. Thus, when Booking.com sought to register its domain name as a trademark, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) denied registration, holding that “booking” is just a generic term for making travel reservations and that merely adding a top-level domain name like “.com” does not elevate the term to one that is protectable.

Booking.com appealed the decision to a federal district court and offered evidence, including consumer surveys, showing that consumers perceive “Booking.com” to be a brand name rather than a generic term for making reservations over the internet. Based on this evidence, the district court reversed the USPTO and held that the term could be registered. The USPTO appealed this decision, but the appeals court affirmed, also holding that Booking.com is not generic.  The USPTO then appealed to the Supreme Court.

The USPTO argued for a bright-line rule that would hold any combination of a generic term and a generic top-level domain name like “.com” unregistrable as a trademark. The USPTO further argued that Booking.com is generic because the term “booking” alone is generic for the services Booking.com offers and the addition of “.com” does not transform Booking.com into a non-generic term. The Court disagreed with the USPTO’s argument and agreed with Booking.com, ultimately ruling 8-1 that Booking.com is not generic and is protectable as a trademark.

In reaching its conclusion, the Court rejected the USPTO’s per se rule and instead focused its inquiry on whether consumers perceive Booking.com to be generic.  The Court also held that the term “Booking.com” cannot be broken down to its constituent parts—namely, “booking” and “.com”—but rather must be viewed as a whole. The Court held that because “Booking.com” viewed as a whole is not generic to consumers, it is not a generic term. 

This decision carries with it many implications for other companies, particularly those that operate on the internet, that may wish to register trademarks similarly composed of a purported generic term and a top-level domain name. 

McCarter & English has a team of lawyers with expertise in trademark law ready to assist with any trademark-related needs.

sidebar

pdfemail

Related People

Media item: Erik Paul Belt
Erik Paul Belt

Partner

Media item: Alexander L. Ried
Alexander L. Ried

Associate

Related Services

Intellectual Property
Subscribe to our Insights
McCarter & English, LLP
Copyright © 2023 McCarter & English, LLP. All Rights Reserved.
  • Login
  • Attorney Advertising
  • Privacy
  • Awards Methodology
  • Contact
  • Subscribe
  • Sitemap

The McCarter & English, LLP website is for informational purposes only. We do not provide legal advice on this website. We can provide legal advice only to our clients in specific inquiries that they address to us. If you are interested in becoming a client, please contact us, but do not send any information about your specific legal question. We cannot serve as your lawyers until we establish an attorney-client relationship, which can occur only after we follow procedures within our firm and after we agree to the terms of the representation.

Accept Cancel