When I first saw the mLife commercials, I assumed it had something to do with MetLife. Obviously, wrong. But MetLife feels the same way and is suing AT&T Wireless. “MetLife said in a statement that it disapproved of AT&T Wireless’ use of the term, which it found “confusingly similar” and potentially “dilutive” to MetLife’s own trademarks, “thereby causing irreparable harm to the company.” The New York-based insurance company also said the mLife ads were similar to MetLife’s own “have you met life today?” campaign, which, it said, “also address issues such as enhancing life significance in an emotional way.” MetLife also objected to AT&T Wireless’ frequent use of “mLife” as spelled “mlife,” which it felt were similar to “have you met life today?”.”
AT&T of course thinks the suit is frivilous. As a consumer, MetLife was the first thing I thought of, and isn’t that the purpose of a trademark? To have the ability to brand it and make it your own identity for your company? Yes, it is. Now I just hope the courts back them up on that for the sake of business small & large everywhere.
3 replies on “That’s What I Thought At First…”
I’m with you. I thought for sure it was some new Met Life campaign when I first saw it. The *last* thing on my mind was a cellular phone gig, let alone AT&T Wireless.
well said. i think MetLife has a very strong case here.
Does anyone know where I could get an exact copy of the advertisement?If so please email me.