According to Alibaba, its business in the U.S. was hurt by Alibabacoin, due to the similar name causing actual confusion amongst customers.
Alibabacoin through its lawyers had rejected the charges, calling the demand for a name change “neither a reasonable or proportionate response to our client’s entirely legitimate use of an inherently generic word which emanates not from China, but indeed from the very region in respect of which your client would seek to prohibit its use.” He further stated that the fact that ICOs are banned in China means that confusing the two is even less likely.
On April 30, Judge Paul Oetken, dissolved the temporary restraining order that had been placed on Alibabacoin. According to the Judge, Alibaba had not proved that Alibabacoin was trying to conduct business in the United States. He said that any loss of business for Alibaba likely originated in its country of origin.
Alibaba Group spokesperson, while responding to the ruling reportedly stated that: “Alibaba Group is not affiliated with the ABBC Foundation. The court’s ruling on April 30 was with respect to jurisdiction. We will be submitting a new motion and are confident we will be able to put an end to this willful, concerted and unlawful scheme by the ABBC Foundation to exploit Alibaba Group trademarks.”