Match Group file multiple lawsuits after repeated failed acquisition offer

IMO this is less about IP laws and more about the incorrect incentive structure of frivolous litigation. The penalties incurred by Match for filing this lawsuit (assuming the court agrees with the interpretation in this post) should be not only that they have to cover the defendant's legal expenses, but they should have to pay 10x that in punitive damages on top of it.

Yet another case study that shows how IP[1] laws are used by incumbent players to stifle innovators. Even trademark laws, which in principle are the least onerous type of IP, lead to million dollar lawsuits in practice (and apparently that&#x27;s in a less expensive jurisdiction). Also, this story seems to agree with other anecdotes I&#x27;ve heard about the dangers of rejecting acquisition offers from large competitors; there is a high risk of them cloning your product&#x2F;strategy or using the legal system as a weapon (in this case, it appears both tactics were used).<p>[1] I read this as &quot;intellectual protectionism&quot;.

This is a monopoly (Match own 40+ other companies) every way you look at it and muzmatch have my support.<p>This all seems like a classic jealous bigger guy that couldn&#x27;t get it&#x27;s way and is throwing its toys out the pram.<p>I hope this backfires and Match get stung in all this. If anyone from Match is reading, your conglomerate won&#x27;t do this app or its complicated community any justice anywhere near as the founder would.<p>Keep your (very) rich hands off.

I just want to emphasize, for those that don&#x27;t know, that they own basically every dating site you&#x27;ve heard of and it&#x27;s a giant monopoly:<p>&gt; including Tinder, Match.com, Meetic, OkCupid, Hinge, PlentyOfFish, Ship, and OurTime totalling over 45 global dating companies<p>The ones not in that list are owned (at least in part) by Andrey Andreev: Badoo, Bumble, Lumen, Chappy and Hot or Not.

It&#x27;s very unfortunate but the reality is these kind of things happen often. I don&#x27;t think match group is high on ethics, nor would I expect any $30bn+ group to be. The top layer in an organization like that thinks only in finance and legal.<p>Hopefully the courts in the UK side with you (they are quite fair) and that you can get back to business.

&gt; Nov 2021 - It is very expensive litigating in the US. We made the economic decision to settle our US case with Match Group.<p>That system has turned into and proven an abject failure for multiple decades now, and somehow there is still no will to fix it.<p>There are few things as infuriating as systemic injustice.

I found an article on the Mirror from 2015 (picture below). Their muzmatch logo and heart seem to have a similar font and heart placement when comparing to what Google gives for the current match logo. In present day, muzmatch seems to use a different font and a butterfly.<p>I&#x27;m not a trademark lawyer so I have no legal argument to make, but I dont think match is insane for wanting to have a court of law decide if this company has stolen their trademark.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.mirror.co.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;gallery&#x2F;tinder-for-muslims-5277435" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.mirror.co.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;gallery&#x2F;tinder-for-muslims-527...</a>

Sonos sues for infringing on their patent for controlling the volume of multiple speakers at the same time, Match group sues for infringing on their patent for swiping left&#x2F;right... I&#x27;m starting to notice a pattern here.<p>I understand why the patent system exists and its pitfalls aren&#x27;t easy to solve but god does it suck so much when it gets abused by corporations.

I know this is in specific domain, but trademark on common word seems strange to me.

&quot;[removed swiping] Made zero impact on the product. Swiping really is dead.&quot;<p>Couldn&#x27;t agree less. Having used Hinge vs Tinder. It&#x27;s a huge ergonomic difference.

shaadi.com pre-dates muzmatch by something like 15 years... it was a mainstream service a decade before this guy launched.

Interacting with match.com still appears to be associated with picking up incurable ailments after all these years

I can totally see the brand harm here. There’s nothing Muzmatch can do to make users not associate them with Match.com, even if they truly want to. It’s what I thought at first.<p>I don’t blame Match for any of this, as much as I want to root for a startup.