Blockchain.com VS Paymium, Trademark infringement case to proceed

The ongoing case between cryptocurrency wallet and exchange operator Blockchain.com and Paymium, a fintech startup, about trademark infringement has taken an interesting turn as the New York Federal Court has declined the motion to dismiss the case regarding the use of the domain ‘Blockchain.io’.

How it all began

The lawsuit was first filed on September 20, 2018, when Blockchain Luxembourg or Blockchain.com sued the startup Paymium primarily for trademark infringement and also for unfair competition, false advertising, and a false claim that they were registered with the SEC.

Paymium conducted an ICO in February 2018 by rebranding themselves as Blockchain.io. This is where it all began, the base of the entire case. A part of to the complaint by the Suers stat that:

“Paymium’s use of the [BLOCKCHAIN.IO] Marks is likely to cause consumers mistakenly to believe that the Paymium’s products emanate from or are otherwise associated with [Blockchain].”

Paymium, in February 2019, had filed a motion in response “to dismiss the amended complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted […] and for lack of personal jurisdiction over Pierre Noizat.” Blockchain.com argued in return that the defendant’s case was not inherently descriptive, their marks acquired secondary meaning and the Blockchain marks and Blockchain.io marks were substantially similar enough to allow the case to continue. The court agreed to this reasoning.

Paymium made false claims of being registered with the SEC

Paymium had also claims against them for false advertising, the ad stated, “Paymium is pleased to announce [its] filing has been accepted and [it is] now registered with the SEC!” but this was not the case. What the company registered at that time with was a U.S Securities and Exchange Commission was a Form D. The Suers further argued that “the filing of a Form D does not mean that a security is ‘registered’ or that it has been in any way scrutinized or approved by the SEC.” The court also consented to this.

However, all claims against Pierre Noizat were dismissed due to lack of personal jurisdiction. Also the claims regarding Paymium’s ad where they stated their “hack-free status and atomic swaps” were also deemed to be true by the court.