, , , , , , ,

A London-based e-health company known as Fitbug has filed suit against health gadget maker Fitbit, arguing that Fitbit’s name is confusingly similar to Fitbug, hurting the Fitbug business. While Fitbug launched in 2005 and offers a fitness-tracking service via electronic tracking devices, as well as web-based nutrition advice, and digital coaching, whereas Fitbit debuted in 2007 and offers activity trackers and smart scales.

Fitbug appealed that consumers wrongly assume that Fitbug and Fitbit are related. People have called and emailed Fitbug asking for help with their Fitbit devices, and business partners have confused to the two firms.

Fitbug also claims that Fitbit’s logos and other marketing materials are “markedly similar” to those of Fitbug. That includes the use of faceless, exercising silhouettes, according to documents provided by Fitbug.

It will be interesting to know how the case proceeds in California. will the Jury focus only on the logo and takeupon the case or will he look into the confusing word based on the customers, business partners assumption? will jury keep in mind about the marketing materials of Fitbit which is similar to Fitbug? will Jury reward cost if Fitbug wins?

Follow us for the part 2 of the case.

The author is a patent professional from MR Technollect, an IP Consulting firm, New Delhi.

Visit us at http://www.mrtechnollect.com for IP related query.