Any questions about the validity of RIM filing suit against Samsung over the BlackJack I had this past weekend have been put to rest. It has to be news when it hits the Washington Post.The story has no comment from Cingular nor Samsung, but plenty from RIM. There is a lot more detail now as to what is in the suit.
RIM is concerned the BlackJack is similar in name, color, and size to the Pearl and this might confuse consumers. The suit mentions the BlackJack ads that Cingular has put on television, which I have seen, that capitalize on the similarities.
There is also mention of a Samsung i600 released overseas that is very similar to the BlackJack, but uses a completely different name. RIM suggests that Samsung did not use the BlackJack name overseas as the BlackBerry is not as popular there.
What do you think?
1. All I can say:
Melissa, do you feel insulted by RIM's lawyers? They seem to imply RIM's customers are seriously intellectually challenged. They believe we cannot tell the BlackJack sports a QWERTY keyboard and the Pearl does not. They think we spell "BlackBerry" as "SAMSUNG" because those are the letters we can see dead centered on the BlackJack.
I have seen the latest commercial of the BlackJack. It is promoting the device as being fun. Does that infringe BlackBerry's trademark? Would the same person who confuses the Pearl with the BlackJack also get confused by the Black Moto Q sitting side by side with the Pearl?
Posted at 7:27PM on Dec 13th 2006 by jyp