The Queensland women’s cricket team is on the back foot after an attempt by the state’s fire and emergency services to prevent them trademarking their 25-year-old name.
The Queensland Fire cricket team competes in the Women’s National Cricket League and has been playing under that banner since 1997.
Queensland Fire players in a huddle before playing Tasmania at Allan Border Field this week.Credit: Albert Perez/Getty
While the Queensland Fire cricket team logo has been trademarked with IP Australia since 2004, the current trademark application, which was filed in October 2019, concerns the use of the phrase “Queensland Fire”.
Queensland Fire and Emergency Services objected to the trademark, arguing it was “substantially identical or deceptively similar” to its own usage and was “likely to deceive or cause confusion”.
A Queensland Cricket spokesman said the organisation had been progressively working to protect its intellectual property (IP) and, as the women’s game became more professional, it felt the need to safeguard the Queensland Fire brand.
“Our stance is we can work in good faith to co-exist with QFES,” he said.
Citing legal sensitivities, QFES declined to comment on the case, nor would a spokesman reveal how much the government agency had spent on the exercise.
University of Queensland trademark expert Professor John Swinson, who also serves as an arbitrator for the World Intellectual Property Organisation in Geneva, said the process of registering trademarks and engaging outside legal counsel had likely already cost taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars.
And he said it was not entirely clear why that money was being spent.
Professor John Swinson.Credit: Robert Shakespeare
“Trademarks don’t give you ownership of a word, they just protect what you’re doing – or are intending to do – in relation to how you’re actually using that term,” Swinson said.
“If there’s no overlap between two businesses and they’re in different fields, and there’s no consumer confusion, then both can have the same or similar trademark. That happens a lot.
“So here, you’d have to look at what is the overlap between a Queensland cricket team and Queensland Fire and Emergency Services.
“It’s hard to see what that overlap would be and why the government would be concerned about a cricket team that’s been playing for 20 years.”
Queensland Cricket’s trademark application specifically outlines several uses of “Queensland Fire”, including the use of the name on clothing, sports equipment and in gaming, among other applications.
“It doesn’t seem to have anything to do with what the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service [sic] does,” Swinson said.
One area in which QFES would want to prevent any confusion was the provision of emergency services where lives were at stake. After all, Swinson said, it would not be a good thing if people were calling a cricket team for help when their house was on fire.
“We don’t want people to be confused when lives are at stake, but Queensland Fire cricket team has been playing for decades, so unless there is evidence of actual confusion, it would seem like a hard case,” he said.
But Queensland University of Technology intellectual property expert Professor Matthew Rimmer said QFES could well have a case, given that neither “Queensland” or “fire” were particularly distinctive words.
“I don’t think it’s a bad thing that Queensland Fire and Rescue [sic] are opponents,” he said.
“In some ways, in terms of our IP system, there’s not enough opposition from government bodies or public entities.
“There really should be some activity to try to preserve certain other uses for government use, but certain things could also be left in the public domain as well.
“Not everything should be subject to a trademark application.”