Intel wins against Comintel

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

Intel wins against Comintel

The word Intel looks very attractive for a trade mark. It implies intelligence because the reader will easily guess the second part of the word, and it is read and pronounced easily. So sooner or later it was going to happen. A Russian company seemingly built a strong defence: it first assumed the name Comintel Ltd and later, registered the trade mark Comintel, No 259074 in Class 38 (TV broadcasting, cable TV, e-communication).

Intel Corporation appealed against the registration of Comintel. The Patent Office rejected the appeal, which was not surprising. During the examination of the application the Office undoubtedly examined the designations Intel and Comintel for similarity and did not find any. It would hardly be expected that the Patent Office would go back on its previous thinking. Intel appealed the decision of the Chamber of Patent Disputes (part of the Patent Office) in court. The court satisfied the claims of Intel. That decision was appealed by the Patent Office but the Appeal Court upheld the decision at the first instance. The Patent Office appealed in the Cassation Instance Court, but the case was dismissed again.

When examining the case the courts argued that the key element in the controversial trade mark was the word Comintel (the trade mark also contained a figurative element that looked like a crescent moon). The word Comintel can be divided into two parts: Com" and Intel. In so doing, the second part visually and phonetically implies association with Intel Corporation because the letters in both trade marks are written in Latin characters in standard font. The figurative part of Comintel also brings up some association with Intel, which has an oval figure in its design (Registration No 198865). Based on that, the consumer may think that Comintel and Intel are abbreviated names of companies which provide services in the field of communications and further draw a conclusion that there are links between them.

Hence Intel won the conflict. The existence of Comintel company, however, remained outside the conflict and it still exists as well as the domain name comintel.ru. It seems that Intel lost further interest in punishing the infringer.

biriulin.jpg

Vladimir Biriulin


Gorodissky & Partners

Russia 129010, Moscow

B. Spasskaya Str

25, stroenie 3

Tel: +7 495 937 6116 / 6109

Fax: +7 495 937 6104 / 6123

pat@gorodissky.ru

www.gorodissky.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Three successive wins have got the firm eyeing additional opportunities as ITC work booms
While many firms remain focused on generative AI, recent hires and practice launches suggest the next battle may be for lawyers who understand how AI is moving into the physical world
The explosion of data centres has prompted patent pool operators to create new licensing opportunities
The court struck out copyright claims brought by Ladbrokes owner Entain, saying that ownership details should have been completed before litigation began
Düsseldorf has overtaken Munich as the UPC's busiest division, while firms including Winston Taylor, Clifford Chance, and Hoyng Rokh Monegier featured in disputes involving Abbott, Essity, Amazon and Hurom
The managing partner gave up an equity partnership track in New York to build a practice in India. More than a decade later, she discusses entrepreneurship, leadership, and why women should not wait before taking the next step
Vice presidents Shinya Jitsuhiro and Hirohisa Suzuki discuss litigation trends in Japan, recruitment challenges and clients’ international expansion
IP boutique Petillion represented IKEA in the dispute, which concerned the use of the multinational’s trademarks in an immigration-focused campaign. The firm tells Managing IP how it secured the outcome
The Pizzeys-Griffith Hack integration was designed to create a stronger Australian IP platform but with several ex-Pizzeys principals now gone, the deal's success may depend on where clients place their trust
Thomas Lonsdale and Hsu Min Chung of HGF explore the practical impact of the EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal’s decision in G1/25 and its interplay with G1/24
Gift this article