Instead of patent disputes over the formula for manufacturing Covid-19 vaccines as during the Covid-19 pandemic from 2020 to 2022, this time, the intellectual property dispute among these pharmaceutical giants will revolve around the issue of trademarks, specifically the trademark “COVID MVAX.”
Diseases has accompanied humanity since the early stages of civilization, but Covid-19 became the first virus to achieve global coverage over thousands of years. With the development of aviation allowing disease vectors to easily attach to passengers and travel worldwide, Covid-19 officially became the fastest-spreading disease.
However, considering the relatively manageable nature of Covid-19 might provide some consolation for humanity. But after Covid-19 temporarily stabilized in most countries, instead of battling the virus, pharmaceutical companies are now trying to take the battle to the court revolving around the claim for a trademark called “COVID MVAX.”
Two companies involved in this dispute are GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Moderna. Both companies have invested significant resources in developing Covid-19 vaccines. Most people have heard of Moderna’s name over the past years, while GSK is a relatively small-scale pharmaceutical company, mainly prominent in Canada.
In most usual cases of pharmaceutical companies, consumers and healthcare workers simply refer to these vaccines by the manufacturer’s name. For example, they would go to a vaccination center hoping to receive a Pfizer or Moderna shot.
However, GlaxoSmithKline broke this convention by filing a trademark application for “COVID MVAX” in April 2020. After facing numerous challenges, three years after the application, the trademark registration application for COVID MVAX was officially published in the Trademark Journal.
Upon receiving this news, Moderna filed an opposition to the trademark registration, requesting the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to reject GSK’s application.
Unlike other oppositions, Moderna did not claim confusion with other trademarks or seek compensation for any infringement by GlaxoSmithKline. Instead, Moderna argued that GSK’s trademark registration would have a negative impact on all vaccine manufacturing companies.
In its opposition filed with the TTAB, Moderna argued that COVID MVAX is merely a descriptive and generic term. In the trademark application, GlaxoSmithKline explicitly stated that they do not claim exclusive rights to the term “COVID,” as some other pharmaceutical companies and even unrelated businesses and individuals have also used it. Instead, they focus on obtaining ownership rights related to “MVAX.”
However, Moderna pointed out that the term “vax” is simply an abbreviation for “vaccine.” This term is widely used by the public, so the only significant modification from a descriptive term is the addition of the letter “M” in the trademark application for COVID MVAX. Moderna asserts that this addition is not enough to make the trademark distinctive.
Moderna also argued that the term MVAX has not gained widespread consumer recognition, which is crucial in the USPTO’s consideration of trademark registrations. Therefore, Moderna claims that this trademark does not meet the requirements for registration, supplementing the argument that if registered, other pharmaceutical companies would not be able to use the term VAX in their trademarks.
Leave a Reply