It always seemed weird that Delta Air Lines and Marriott’s Delta Hotels brand co-exist. Delta the airline thinks it’s weird, too, and they’re suing Marriott. The trademark infringement trial started Monday.
Delta Hotels started in Canada over 50 years ago. Marriott acquired the brand in 2015. In Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Marriott International, Inc. (N.D. Ga. No. 1:20‑cv‑01125) Delta says Marriott’s “Delta Hotels” branding infringes and dilutes Delta’s DELTA marks.
Credit: Delta Victoria Ocean Pointe Resort
Marriott countered with a 2015 agreement, negotiated between the airline and hotel brand prior to acquisition. The court has already ruled that this applied only to Hong Kong and China. Delta told the court on Monday that Marriott tried to “hijack” Delta’s brand and goodwill.
- Delta says there’s actual confusion. Customers complain in the wrong place, adn they have a survey. They have overlapping customers and advertise in the same media.
- But there are hundreds of uses of ‘Delta’ out there. Delta Air Lines comes from the Mississippi Delta in the first place, they dindn’t exactly make up the word. And they’re in different industries (airlines versus hotels), no one is going to buy a room at a Delta hotel to get from Atlanta to New York.
- The logos have some similarities, but aren’t the same. Delta hotels clearly wasn’t trying to play on the airline’s brand favorability over fifty years ago in Western Canada. But what about today? I don’t know that any business wants to be thought of as like an airline to be honest. Then again, I’m reminded that the whole idea behind acquiring Delta Hotels was to use the brand for cheap conversions – bringing owners into Marriott who didn’t want to spend a lot of money. As the Wall Street Journal explained at the time,
Delta owners will be allowed to keep stucco ceilings (also known as cottage cheese ceilings), bathtub showers and in-wall air-conditioning systems…hotel owners would pay up to 50% less to convert a hotel to a Delta compared with upgrading the property to the Marriott brand.
Marriott’s DELTA registration was rejected in the U.K. That’s not dispositive here, but it’s persuasive. A customer could be confused if they went to Delta Vacations and booked a Delta Hotel that Delta presented to them, but what’s the economic harm here? These are different products but they’re probably complementary rather than in truly distinct sectors.
In other words, it doesn’t seem like a truly slam dunk case but it’s still a plausible one. Delta could win. Then what?
- Injunction narrowing or prohibiting U.S. use of DELTA for hotel services without prominent non‑confusing qualifiers, or potentially forced rebrand of U.S. Delta Hotels; corrective advertising; profits/damages.
- Although ‘Delta Hotels by Marriott’ already seems qualified. I’d expect any finding for Delta to mean an even stronger “by Marriott” usage, disclaimers, and style‑guide changes.
Leaving aside what the law actually is, I have to think that what should be is that it seems fine for a hotel brand to use the name Delta because they’ve done so for over half a century. And it seems fine for that brand to expand, even in the U.S. market! (It’s also ok for Delta Air Lines to fly to Canada, by the way.) But the hotel brand shouldn’t use a logo similar to the airline, and it’s a good idea to lean into “by Marriott.”
@Gene — This a tough one… I’d imagine your take is… ‘can they both somehow lose?’
Wow, I’d been wondering about this! There is a “Delta Hotels” Marriott along I-5 in Everett, Washington that I pass occasionally. But also in Washington State, I used to have dental insurance through a company called “Delta Dental.” Plus, there is a brand of kitchen and bathroom faucets called “Delta!” 😀
I don’t understand why Marriott used the Delta name in the first place. They could have used any name under the sun. Delta was a small Canadian hotel chain — properties that were actually somewhere between a Sheraton and Westin in quality and operating standards. Delta pre-Marriott had ZERO properties outside Canada.
@Shirley — There are different types of trademarks, and so long as they are distinct areas that do not intersect, in the USA at least, they allow them to co-exist.
*walks into a Home Depot*
“Hello, I’d like a faucet; do you have any Delta?”
*store clerk hands customer a 737*
“Woah, I meant the hotel chain!”
*explosion*
I think Delta Air Lines has reached the point of insanity, and is wasting ridiculous money on this lawsuit, which they will lose.
Marriott could take a page from Apple’s playbook and rename the chain “Butt-Head Airline Hotels.”
Does Ed’s BFF stay at Delta Hotels for free, too?
Stucco ceilings, bathtub showers, and in-wall air conditioning units are not supposed to be in Marriott hotels?
I guess the Marriott hotels I stayed at didn’t get the memo. I see them regularly.
Delta the repulsive alleged airline that’s nothing more than an overblown egotistical crop duster has no case and can go pound salt. They don’t own the name. It’s the fourth freaking letter of the Greek alphabet and has long been in public domain. Oh, how I wish this airline could die tomorrow.
I think of Marriott agrees to hold up brand standards so that Delta hotels appear premium, there’s room for a compromise here.
Can Marriott sue Delta Air Lines for sullying a vaunted name?
Asking for a friend named Dim Tunn.
When you say “Delta” like in Delta® Air Lines or the Delta® SkyMiles® rewards program, many people think of PREMIUM services and amenities. When you say “Delta” like in Delta Hotels by Marriott, many people think of crappy, bottom-of-the-barrel hobo and homeless subsidized shelters that might be the official hotel of drug dealers.
A Trip Advisor review by a guest at the Delta Hotels by Marriott Toronto East writes, “Careful about staying at this hotel. They are currently housing the homeless and majority of their space is used for the shelter. Since the Delta has been turned into a shelter there’s been increased garbage to the area, loitering, and safety issues.”
A premium airline like Delta Air Lines is concerned about trademark dilution, which is the unauthorized use of its famous trademark in a way that harms its distinctiveness (blurring) or reputation (tarnishment).