On Aug 15, 2008, at 4:16 PM, G. Jason Head wrote:
Interesting enough it has to do a bit with the user interface on the
PNC Virtual Wallet site:
"The site features several orange balls used to highlight products and
services PNC offers. ING alleges that PNC's use of the orange balls
could confuse customers who associate the orange balls with ING."
More info on the Post-Gazette site:
http://www.postgazette.com/pg/08228/904608-100.stm
Yup. Trademark infringement. Surprised that PNC went ahead with it.
Usually these things are settled before the suit is launched. (There's
a bunch of steps that ING would go through, starting with a standard
Cease & Desist letter.)
The interesting thing is that you can't easily argue it's a trademark
infringement if the elements are functional. By definition, trademark
(and trade dress) elements have to be non-functional, which is why we
don't see more of these types of suits on web sites.
However, that's a defense, which means that PNC will have to spend a
lot of money in court to protect the use of the orange balls. That's
why I'm surprised it's gotten this far -- I'm betting it's not worth
it to keep them orange. But, what do I know?
Jared
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
