Palantir.net Gets Preliminary Injunction Against Palantir Technologies
Palantir Technologies Inc. v. Palantir.net, Inc. is a trademark case from the Northern District of California concerning the parties’ right to use the trademark PALANTIR. For added color, the case involves a bit of lore from the Lord of the Rings.
As Judge Charles Breyer explained, a palantir is a “magical artifact from the Lord of the Rings trilogy. It is a stone that functions somewhat like a crystal ball; when one looks in it, one can communicate with other Stones and anyone who might be looking into them. People of great power can manipulate the Stones to see virtually any part of the world.”
Palantir.net’s predecessor began providing Web design, development, and database services nationally under the Palantir name in 1996. It acquired the palantir.net domain name in 1997. Palantir.net incorporated in 2000 and obtained a federal registration for PALANTIR in 2006. It sells to educational and cultural institutions, as well as financial, corporate, and governmental clients.
Palantir Technologies designs database software for the Central Intelligence Agency and a financial services company. It started offering products under PALANTIR in 2005. It is a small company but it purchases the word “palantir” from Google’s AdWords service and outranks Palantir.net in Google search engine results.
Palantir.net moved for a preliminary injunction enjoining Palantir Technologies from using PALANTIR in advertising. The Northern District of California concluded: “Palantir.net has easily proven the existence of serious questions going to the merits; indeed, the Court finds that it has also demonstrated a probable success on the merits given (1) the virtual identity of the marks, (2) the strength of the mark, (3) the relatedness of the goods, and (4) both parties’ use of the Internet. The balance of hardships also tips sharply in Palantir.net’s favor given its long-time use of the mark, the importance of the mark to word-of-mount referrals, and [Palantir Technologies’] recklessness in adopting the mark for its young business without first searching for any similar trademarks. Palantir.net’s motion for a preliminary injunction is therefore GRANTED.”
In imposing a preliminary injunction, the court required Palantir Technologies to place on all of its Web sites, including its blog, a “prominent disclaimer that advises viewers that it is different from Palantir.net and that advises viewers how to access Palantir.net.” The court also enjoined Palantir Technologies from “engaging in any Internet advertising under the palantir mark, that is, no more Google advertisements.”
The case cite is Palantir Technologies, Inc. v. Palantir.net, Inc., 2008 WL 152339, No. 07-3863 (N.D. Calif. Jan. 15, 2008).
Michael Atkins
3 Comments
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (3)
I took the description of Palantir Technologies' business from the order, which states: "Palantir.net reviewed PTI's website and determined that PTI was involved in designing database software for others and hiring interaction designers and software engineers, the same as Palantir.net."
As to whether the parties' goods are related, the court (obviously) disagreed with your conclusion. It found that "PTI's definition of 'related services' for purposes of trademark infringement is too narrow." Citing Brookfield Communications, the court stated: "the focus is on whether the consuming public is likely somehow to associate PTI's products/services with Palantir.net's products and services."
Applying this test, the court found:
"Here both companies offer products and services relating to the computer software industry generally, and their lines of business include analysis and management specifically. Their lines of business are not identical, but are certainly related. PTI's emphasis on the fact that it primarily sells a product -- Palantir Government and Palantir Financial -- whereas Palantir.net sells a service -- customized software applications -- is a distinction without much significance. Both companies offer clients the ability to manage and analyze data through software."