Fizz has decided to fight back not just by speaking out but by suing Instacart and Partiful. The popular social networking app, created specifically for the Gen Z crowd, claims trademark infringement and unfair competition. Founded in 2020, Fizz has gained traction across more than 400 college campuses. Since initially registering its trademark in December of 2021, it has boomed into the metadata on TikTok, resonating with a youthful demographic.
The clash began when Instacart opened Fizz, a new drinks and snacks delivery app. Fizz argues that this new launch violates its trademark on its developed brand. The lawsuit accuses both Instacart and Partiful of trademark dilution. As count three of the suit states, they had no right to use the “FIZZ” name, infringing on common law and federal laws. On top of that, Fizz claims they’re guilty of cybersquatting and California’s unfair competition laws.
Since at least as early as January 2022, Fizz has continuously used the registered “FIZZ” trademark, claiming it is well-known in its field to consumers aged 21-39. The plaintiff claims that Instacart and Partiful are capitalizing on its hard-won name recognition. They want to take advantage of the goodwill the company has earned with the Gen Z community.
The lawsuit comes after a similar case Fizz filed against competitor Sidechat back in 2023 over unfair competition torts. This new drama underscores just how cutthroat social media can be for the youth demo. It’s particularly striking in fields like public programming and civic engagement.
Fizz makes a case that Partiful is even competing against them directly to help people organize events. This developing rivalry further complicates the evolving landscape of trademark rights within the industry. The lawsuit seeks a jury trial and asks for injunctive relief. It wants monetary damages and a permanent injunction preventing both companies from using the name “FIZZ.”
“This new Fizz App by Instacart and Partiful is a blatant attempt to misappropriate the goodwill that Plaintiff has painstakingly developed through its continuous use of the FIZZ Marks among the Gen-Z demographic.”
The lawsuit draws attention to an alleged intent by Instacart and bad faith intent to capitalize on Fizz’s well-known brand identity. It states, “Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that Defendant Instacart had a bad faith intent to profit from the FIZZ Marks when it registered the domain name <FIZZ.COM>.”
Leave a Reply