The gaming add-ons organization Performance Designed Products LLC has filed a federal lawsuit accusing Poly of using a knockoff of its logo as the centerpiece of the main rebranding initiative released Ultimate Week. The lawsuit accuses Poly of violating federal trademark law by using the brand new brand, which PDP Gaming argues is almost equal to a logo it commenced using publicly in October 2018. In addition, it seeks economic damages and a permanent injunction in opposition to Poly’s use of the logo. “We no longer touch upon ongoing litigation commonly, but we developed our brand independently and disputed the claims raised,” a Poly spokesperson stated.
Plantronics received Polycom’s final 12 months, and the two organizations rebranded as Poly at the Enterprise Connect convention on March 18. The move was a great and volatile step for Poly, as it opted to retire two brands with a sturdy name reputation. In a press release, Poly stated its new logo paid homage to the Polycom Trio conference room phone and Plantronics’ records of creating headsets for airplane pilots.
PDP Gaming developed its brand in March 2018, posted it online in October 2018, and began accepting pre-orders for a headset bearing the emblem in January 2019, consistent with the organization’s lawsuit, filed last week in U.S. District Court in southern California.
The lawsuit makes no point of using PDP Gaming to gain formal recognition of its emblem from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). However, such popularity isn’t necessary to bring matches under certain federal trademark law sections.
“The absence of registration isn’t always tremendous, but it is no longer an enormous problem either,” stated Bruce Ewing, an intellectual assets attorney and companion at Minneapolis-based Dorsey & Whitney LLP.
PDP Gaming-Poly emblem dispute
In part, the lawsuit accuses Poly of violating a section of the regulation related to the use of an image in a way that could cause confusion over a product’s genuine origins. PDP Gaming and Poly’s Plantronics division each make purchaser headsets for gaming.
Ewing said that PDP Gaming’s exceedingly short use of the emblem may want to play into Poly’s desire. The court docket will remember the marks, phrases, advertising, and marketing surrounding each. However, Poly may also want to explain how it advanced an emblem of such a comparable design.
“[PDP Gaming] has no longer been using the mark, this brand that it created, for all that long,” Ewing stated. “So I think there may be a valid question about the volume to which purchasers associate that layout with [PDP Gaming].”
