Circle Internet Group Accuses Just A Circle of Brand Infringement

Circle Internet Group, the corporation behind the stablecoin USDC, has accused the memecoin Just A Circle, with the ticker $CRCL, of brand infringement. The memecoin was launched on June 18 on Bonk.Fun. Shortly after its launch, members of the memecoin community noticed that Solscan had changed the ticker from $CRCL to “SPL Token,” adding a disclaimer stating “copyrighted or trademarked material without authorization.”

Just A Circle reached out to Solscan via email and received a reply on July 7, which stated that Solscan was investigating an allegation of brand infringement following a report submitted by Circle and its authorized representatives. Just A Circle posted a screenshot of the reply on X, tagging Solscan and Circle, and urged them to review the matter, stating, “We are literally just a circle. We urge you to review your false claims and rescind this DMCA.”

This tweet led to a significant increase in the market cap of Just A Circle ($CRCL), rising from $500k to $15 million within 15 minutes. However, at the time of writing, the memecoin’s market cap had dropped to $1.44 million. Just A Circle has since posted an AI-generated video on X mocking Circle Internet Group, with an AI narrator saying, “Some people never learned how to play in the sandbox.”

Community members of Just A Circle have been actively fighting back against Circle. They have been emailing Solscan about the ticker name change and reaching out to Circle employees, including CEO Jeremy Allaire and General Counsel Sarah Wilson. Additionally, they are trying to gain support from influential people within the Bonk ecosystem and redirecting some of the creator rewards of $CRCL to Jeremy Allaire’s Solana wallet address. A community member stated that Circle is a $50 billion corporation trying to draw a line in the sand, adding that Circle’s employees are “TradFi players who are helping to create a new game and establish new rules and precedent that only work to their favor.”

This is not the first time Circle Internet Group has faced a ticker problem. The company went public on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker CRCL on June 5. Another company in the oil and gas sector, Corcel PLC, was already using the same ticker symbol, CRCL. The debut of Circle Internet Group’s CRCL prompted investors to buy Corcel PLC’s CRCL shares by mistake, pushing its price up significantly. This incident highlights the challenges that can arise when companies use similar ticker symbols, leading to confusion and potential market disruptions.

Circle's legal action against Just A Circle ($CRCL) underscores its commitment to protecting its brand and ensuring that investors are not misled by imitators. The dispute also raises questions about the regulation of memecoins and the broader cryptocurrency market. As the popularity of these coins continues to grow, regulators and industry participants are grappling with how to balance innovation with investor protection. Circle's legal action against Just A Circle ($CRCL) could set a precedent for future cases, encouraging other companies to take similar steps to protect their brands and intellectual property.

In response to the legal action, Just A Circle ($CRCL) has not yet issued a public statement. However, the memecoin community has been vocal in its support, with some investors expressing frustration at what they see as an overreaction by Circle. The controversy has sparked a broader debate about the role of memecoins in the cryptocurrency ecosystem and the potential for conflict between traditional financial institutions and the decentralized nature of the crypto market.

The outcome of this legal dispute remains uncertain, but it is clear that Circle is taking the issue seriously. The company's decision to file an application with the relevant authorities demonstrates its commitment to protecting its brand and ensuring that investors are not misled by imitators. As the cryptocurrency market continues to evolve, it is likely that similar disputes will arise, highlighting the need for clear regulations and guidelines to govern the use of intellectual property in the digital age.