#copyright #patent #trademarks #brandprotection #infringement #trending #blogging #intellectualproperty #IPR #IPRinfo #IPlaw #IPRrights #Trademarkclickcom #IP #lawfirms #lawyers #legalmarketing #entrepreneur #FinTech #USA #Canada #Toronto #TDBank #Plaid
Along with numerous other surprises digital boom brought along FinTech, another blessing we received in the last 50 years. Nevertheless, it was only after 2008 that a major dependency on FinTech platforms was witnessed. Without a doubt, a leap from traditional paper-based formalities to virtual finance took its time in trust-building, but now, especially in the developed nations, it is basically all that consumers can rely upon. Thanks to FinTech, our dues were paid on time even in this global pandemic. It’s out in the open. FinTech companies are booming. But are these platforms completely reliable? Is giving out our most personal financial information safe? The Toronto-Dominion Bank (TD Bank) is clearly having second thoughts.
A week ago, New Jersey-headquartered TD Bank raised serious allegations against Plaid. Plaid is a reputed FinTech organization in the West known for extending several arms to make the financial journey of a consumer relatively easy. From managing personal finances to providing data, to enhancing APIs with that data, Plaid does it all. Similarly, it accommodates several bank accounts under one platform.
According to TD Bank, it did not permit the San Francisco FinTech company to make use of its trademarks or to display a connection between the two. In simple terms, the present dispute is a prima facie case uprooting from faith deficiency. The trademark infringement complaint filed on October 14 mentions that Plaid unlawfully made use of TD and TD Bank USA NA’s trademark, logos as well as its color scheme with an intention to replicate TD’s genuine login page. As believed by America’s national bank, Plaid’s ultimate motive behind the malice was to lure customers into believing that they shall be handing out their private financial credentials exclusively to the bank, which in fact is not the case.
Looks like Plaid is used to a little legal action. At first, it is already going through a class-action legal dispute based on illicit data invasion and safety and privacy issues. Secondly, last year PNC Financial Services Group Inc. blocked Plaid owing to a lack of adherence to security protocols. The third one of a slightly similar nature is surely a slur on the credibility of Plaid.
Along with a prohibitory order preventing Plaid from making further use of TD’s reputed trade name, logos, and trademarks, statutory damages amounting to $2 million for each service sold, offered or distributed, is pleaded by TD Bank before the Court. In furtherance, an order pertaining to actual and punitive damages coupled with litigation expenses is requested to be passed by the Hon’ble Court.
"We have been working with TD for quite some time, and are disappointed that they resorted to litigation and false allegations — Plaid is publicly known for never selling or renting consumers' personal information," said Plaid in a statement.