Port of Oakland ordered to stop using ‘San Francisco’ in its airport name
Monique Merrill
(CN) — In a Bay Area battle over airport names, the City of San Francisco landed an initial win on Tuesday after a federal court issued a preliminary injunction against the Port of Oakland, ordering it to stop using the name “San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport” to advertise and promote its airport.
“Overall, because the two airports offer identical services, the near identity of the marks makes them confusingly similar,” U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas Hixson wrote in his 34-page ruling.
Since 1954, San Francisco has used the trademarked name "San Francisco International Airport." Earlier in 2024, Oakland announced plans to change its airport’s name from "Metropolitan Oakland International Airport" to "San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport."
San Francisco sued in April, arguing the new airport name infringed its trademark and caused confusion to customers. Hixson largely agreed with San Francisco.
"Including 'San Francisco' in the name of the Oakland airport when there is in fact no affiliation, connection or association between the Oakland airport and San Francisco is contrary to how airports in the United States are normally named and is highly likely to be confusing," he wrote.
San Francisco also argued that customers may mistake the Oakland airport for the San Francisco airport and buy the wrong ticket, or at the very least become confused about whether the Oakland airport is the San Francisco airport before buying tickets.
According to San Francisco, airport staff logged at least 15 cases within a two-month period over the summer in which passengers showed up at their airport instead of the Oakland airport. Hixson noted that the log “suffers from a lack of trustworthiness because it was created as a record for litigation” but admitted it offered “some evidence of customer confusion.”
San Francisco also pointed to a collection of Instagram posts wherein travelers had posted pictures of the San Francisco airport but tagged the Oakland airport, which was only mildly convincing to the court.
“Despite being relevant, these social media posts are substantively ‘weak evidence’ because ‘the court lacks information about the people making the social media posts,’” Hixson wrote.
These arguments on the whole were less convincing to the court, as Hixson found San Francisco to be unlikely to prevail on its initial interest or point of sale confusion claims.
However, the argument that travelers may be confused about whether the two airports are affiliated, connected or associated has legs, Hixson found.
“In terms of appearance, sound and meaning, it is impossible to say, write or read the allegedly infringing mark without also saying, writing or reading San Francisco’s mark because the latter is wholly contained within the former,” Hixson wrote.
The Port of Oakland argued that it was referencing San Francisco Bay, the geographical feature, not San Francisco, the city. The court wasn’t convinced.
“In context, however, that argument is not persuasive. Airline customers care whether an airport is close to San Francisco or in the San Francisco Bay Area, but they do not likely care whether an airport is close to the waterfront of the bay,” Hixson wrote.
While the average air travel customer is likely to research the travel details on how to get to the airport they are flying out of, they are less likely to research who owns the airport, he noted.
“The inclusion of the entirety of San Francisco’s mark in the name of a second airport that is nearby is highly likely to imply affiliation, connection or association to the typical airline customer,” Hixson wrote.
Further, conflating the two airports could damage San Francisco’s solid reputation.
“The port has taken San Francisco’s valuable mark and applied it to a smaller, less successful, and lower rated airport. San Francisco’s mark is now literally in the name of the Oakland airport,” Hixson wrote. “This damages the goodwill and value of San Francisco’s Mark and deprives San Francisco of control over its Mark
The Port of Oakland also argued that the name change was to address the problem of air travelers not knowing where Oakland is.
“The port’s solution to that problem — putting the entirety of San Francisco’s mark into the new name of the Oakland airport — was misguided and improperly implies affiliation between the airports,” Hixson wrote. “But the court is unable to conclude that the port actually wanted to deceive anyone.”
While the Port of Oakland told the court it had ordered signs with the new name, it largely had only changed the name online — a change it has been ordered to revert while the case proceeds. The Port of Oakland is also ordered to stop using the new name to advertise, market or promote any of its products and services.
“The harm to the port is minimal when it remains free to use the well-known name for the Oakland airport that it has used for 60 years,” Hixson wrote.
The City of Oakland, though named as a defendant, was not included in the preliminary injunction as the Port of Oakland is the owner of the airport.