Can you check blue service twitter imposters with tm law?

Todays WT🧁 MOMENT IS c/o #bloomberg

Can you use trademark law to stop blue check wielding Twitter imposters?

Ever since Twitter introduced the $8-per-month “blue service”, the platform has experienced an increase in the number of “verified” impersonator accounts.  Eli Lilly & Co, a pharmaceutical company that sells insulin, was hit hard when a spook account calling itself “Eli Lilly and Company” (impersonator) tweeted “We are excited to announce insulin is free now.” Pepsi Cola likewise experienced a similar spoofing attempt when a verified user called “PepsiCo Inc.” tweeted “Coke is Better.”

🙀WTCupcake 🧁🚫

Even though Twitter has paused its Blue service to deal with the impersonation issue, spoofed companies are turning to trademarks for redress.

Trademark law generally allows a trademark owner (in this case, Eli Lily & CO.) to stop others (Eli Lily and company) from using its mark to identify similar goods and services.  However, there is no trademark infringement when the impersonator’s use is considered “fair use.” Fair use permits use of another’s trademark for comparative advertising, parody, and non-commercial use (academic articles, media reports).

Here, the impersonator, Eli Lily and company can argue that its creation of an impersonating twitter account was parody (or fair use) and not trademark infringement.  And since the impersonator, Eli Lily and company is not actually selling insulin, there is arguably no commercial use.

Despite this defense, infringement may be established if the trademark owner can prove that the impersonator’s parody caused harm by stealing traffic away!

DISCLAIMER:

Darling, this blog is not meant to be legal advice. Rather, these posts represent what I consider to be amazing WTC?! happenings in the field of fashion law. If you are wrestling with a pressing legal issue, please retain a qualified attorney to help! 🧁😉

@mariessaterrellesq

@mariessa.terrell 🔎