An Early Retirement

I wonder if a more measured reaction rather than simply caving would have done them better.

They could have had their lawyers draw up a reasoned defense, then used that to wrangle a settlement offer whereby Watsi takes a large-ish donation in return for changing their logo.

Reason being a big battle would hit the larger plaintiff much harder in terms of public opinion. A little brinksmanship could do them a world of good.

Thoughts? Any legal eagles want to weigh in on whether this be a feasible course of action?

"And don't waste money (as an early startup) on filing for trademark protection - because US trademark law respects common law use (ie, if you used it first, you are protected, even if you didn't file for protection). Registering your trademark does nothing if someone else (with more expensive lawyers) was using it first and can demonstrate that use."

Agree with most of what you are saying.

But with respect to the above paragraph doesn't incorporate the strategy of why you might want to register a trademark even if protected by common law. Some animals are more equal than others.

First, the cost. This can be done without a lawyer by just paying the USPTO fees. So we are talking about $375 (or $325 in the case of certain marks) per category. I've both hired lawyers and I've done this myself as well.

Anyway back to strategy. It gives you a leg to stand on. That's very important in terms of how the other side views you. You have taken the time to register and therefore the other attorneys will give that some thought when they are confering with their client as far as how to proceed. [2] Enough that, in my opinion, and from my experience [1], it is worth the trademark filing fees. (There are attorneys that will do this for $1000 all in by the say if you don't want to diy.)

[1] The leg to stand on principle is something that I have used before several times. In one case I was able to hold off the NCAA (they have big lawyers, right?) and in another case a billion dollar defense contractor. And in lots of small cases. Now this doesn't mean that you will execute as well as I do when doing this but I'd like to point out that it is certainly possible. (My expertise is strategy to the point where I can usually get lawyers that are working for me to agree with my way of doing things that contradicts even with legal precedent.)

[2] Meaning you could potentially extract a pound of flesh or concessions (see NCAA in [1]) just from that leg you lean on.

> Watsi is being classy by not even naming the company There is no doubt as to who a multi-billion dollar health insurance company who would take issue with a logo that is literally a blue cross with a triangle cut out of it. I didn't read their post as classy, but rather snarky. I don't have a problem with them calling out BCBS, but I don't think it is at all classy the way they did it. They may have avoided saying BCBS for legal reasons, but that doesn't make it classy.

I ordered one not just to stick it to BCBS, but also because it's great knowing all of this is going directly to the patients at Watsi. Well played.

It's a shame. I do think they look somewhat look a like, and there are solid reasons why it would or wouldn't cause confusion in trade.

But if the plaintiff is indeed BCBS, then Watsi would have definitely lost. Since BCBS will probably be regarded as a famous mark, and any similarity would cause an issue for Watsi.

It's unfortunate and sad nonetheless.