Open Source Search Firm Accuses Amazon of Trademark Infringement
O'Melveny & Myers is representing search engine Elasticsearch in a complaint that alleges Amazon is willfully infringing its mark by promoting competing search and analytics products.
September 30, 2019 at 07:38 PM
2 minute read
Amazon Elasticsearch Service landing page, as alleged by Elasticsearch Inc.
Open source search and analytics company Elasticsearch Inc. is suing Amazon.com for trademark infringement and false advertising.
O'Melveny & Myers partner David Eberhart and counsel James Rothstein filed a complaint Sept. 27 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of Elasticsearch and its Dutch parent Elasticsearch B.V.
The complaint alleges that Amazon is willfully infringing its mark by promoting competing search and analytics products called Amazon Elasticsearch Service (AESS) and Open Distro for Elasticsearch. Amazon touts AESS as helping users "deploy, secure and operate Elasticsearch at scale with zero down time."
"Due to Amazon's misleading use of the Elasticsearch mark, consumers of search and analytics software are, at least, likely to be confused as to whether Elastic sponsors or approves AESS and Open Distro," the O'Melveny attorneys write.
They further allege that AESS disables certain functionality from Elasticsearch's product, while also including some software code that's not offered by Elasticsearch. "Amazon's use of the Elasticsearch mark therefore constitutes false advertising," they write.
Amazon promotes Open Distro as "a value-added distribution of Elasticsearch that is 100% open source (Apache 2.0 license) and supported by AWS." But Amazon "fails to clearly communicate to consumers that Amazon is the source of Open Distro," the complaint alleges.
Elasticsearch founder Shay Banon launched the original product, which allows users to combine various different searches, in 2010. Adobe, Cisco Systems, eBay, Facebook, Optum and Walmart are among the companies that use the product, according to the complaint.
Guidelines for the open-source product specify that "the Elasticsearch mark my not be part of any product name," according to the complaint, and that use of the mark must not create a sense of affiliation or endorsement by the company, the complaint alleges.
"Amazon cannot plausibly contend that Elastic's guidelines are misguided or impractical," the O'Melveny attorneys write, because Amazon Web Services "imposes materially similar restrictions on the use of Amazon's marks."
Amazon Web Services did not immediately reply to an email seeking comment on the suit.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Trellis Launches Trellis AI, a New Suite of Automated Litigation Tools
3 minute read
AI Startup Founder Defrauded Investors of Millions, US Prosecutors Say
3 minute read
Judge Rejects Meta’s Plea to Send FTC Antitrust Suit to Trash Heap
Quantum Computing Company to Part With General Counsel
Trending Stories
- 1'The Show Must Go On': Solo-GC-of-Year Kevin Colby Pulls Off Perpetual Juggling Act
- 2Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Match Group's Katie Dugan & Herrick's Carol Goodman
- 3Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Eric Wall, Executive VP, Syllo
- 4Battle for Top Talent Accelerates Amid Profit and Demand Surge
- 5Friday Newspaper
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
