Editorial Notebook: The Harvard Name

Our school owns something that's even more valuable than the $19 billion endowment. And it's not locked away in a museum basement or library repository--indeed, it's freely available for anyone who wants to try to take it. But the University is very protective of its most prized possession. Harvard Bioscience, a 100-year-old company that was started by former Harvard Medical School professor William T. Porter, found itself the unwitting target of the University's protectiveness a few weeks ago.

The University alleges that the company's name could be mistaken for a school department and wants it changed. The suit was prompted by the company's recent name change from "Harvard Apparatus" in anticipation of going public. The action is the latest in Harvard's wide-ranging campaign to crack down on companies who seek to profit from seeming to be associated with the University. While the University's zeal in protecting its trademark is understandable in most cases, this latest lawsuit crosses the line from prosecuting malicious pirates to punishing legitimate companies.

Earlier cases in which Harvard sued to protect its name were different. For example, just over a year ago, Congress passed an anti-cyber-squatting measure that touched off a raft of lawsuits, including one against a man who registered domain names such as "harvard-lawschool.com" and attempted to auction then off for thousands of dollars each. The University sued to protect its name--which has been trademarked since 1827--in a justifiable use of the law to protect its own interests.

Cyber-squatting and fake web sites are indeed threats to honest businesses everywhere. In another case, the University sued a Korean company called Itempool Media because the company published books under the name "Harvard Reader." The case, which the University won, was justified because the company was publishing educational materials that might honestly be mistaken as coming from the University itself.

But Harvard Bioscience is no cyber-squatter. It has manufactured and sold medical equipment, including syringe pumps and ventilators, for years. The University's lawsuit has opened up a whole new area where the University could claim its trademark is being infringed. The University has gone from suing those who have intent to deceive and who might actually do damage to pursuing companies that merely "sound like" they might be affiliated with Harvard.

In its pursuit, Harvard casts a wide net in its search for those who use its name. According to the web site of the Office for Technology and Trademark Licensing, "the legal and illegal use of Harvard's name and symbols throughout the world is monitored by an international trademark watch service."

It is important to protect the Harvard name, but the University must realize it didn't invent the name either. There are nearly a dozen people in the Massachusetts phone book with the last name "Harvard," which, according to Oxford University's "Dictionary of Surnames," originally comes from the Old English name "Hereweard," or "army guard."

Harvard should be on guard against those who would reap illegitimate profits from its name. It needs to make sure, however, that it doesn't sully that name by becoming mired in a needless trademark war.