The US District Judge, Paul Oetken, has rejected the retail giant Alibaba’s crypto trademark lawsuit filed against the Alibabacoin (ABBC) Foundation based in the Cayman Islands. The case was determined during the recent court filings hearing.
Alibaba first filed the suit early in April alleging that ABBC Foundation is misleading its investors that Alibaba is involved in the cryptocurrency project due to similar brand names. ABBC Foundation responded by filing a motion against Alibaba stating that Alibaba Group should not be allowed to monopolize the ‘Alibaba name’.
According to the ruling, since the accused firm based on an island and its website is only accessible in New York State, it’s not sufficient enough to render a personal jurisdiction against it. In addition, Alibaba has failed to clearly state a case that a court has concluded over the trademark infringement claim involving the firm’s website.
Ruling Only Applies To Securities
The judge emphasized that Alibaba must have provided evidence that an individual based in the US is managing the Foundation’s website for a decision to be made. According to judge Oetken, Alibaba’s arguments can only apply to the securities cases and not a trademark suit. The judge further stated the Alibaba should specify any economic loss it has incurred in New York in which it has lost customers to the Foundation.
Since Alibaba is not involved in the cryptocurrency market in New York, Beijing or anywhere else, the claims against the ABBC Foundation are baseless according to the court. The two firms are operating in different markets and industries and therefore, there is no economic harm caused.
Alibaba Vows To Defend Its Brand Name
However, Alibaba told Coindesk that it’s planning to submit a new lawsuit against the company stating that the Alibaba Group is not associated with the ABBC Foundation. The giant e-commerce retailer claims that the foundation is exploiting its trademarks. Unfortunately, Alibaba Group’s founder and CEO, Jack Ma, is a crypto skeptic who has expressed his doubts over its transparency and the possibilities of it being used in money-laundering.
