Google could be forced to drop the branding from its ‘YouTube Shorts’ streaming platform after it was accused of “tarnishing” the identity of a smaller rival.

In a trial set to begin in the Royal Courts of Justice today, the tech giant is claimed to have damaged the brand of London-based short film distributor Shorts International by causing “confusion” over its business activities and “diluting” its reputation by “swamping” the market with a flurry of videos “of low production value”, according to court documents seen by UKTN.

“Shorts International has not just lost its distinctiveness, but its services have been overshadowed by the massive scale of Google’s reach, whose pervasive advertising, product availability, and digital presence has quickly drowned it out,” Shorts International will argue today.

“Google proceeded with a blinkered unwillingness to acknowledge in any way the clear signals they were given about the likelihood of confusion and damage to Shorts International and proceeded regardless.

“The consequence of that choice of name is the complete obliteration of Shorts International’s goodwill, which Shorts International pleads this court does something to protect.”

Google has vehemently denied the claims and has previously warned an adverse ruling could result in huge re-branding costs and technical changes on its platform.

The dispute arose following the global rollout of YouTube’s Shorts streaming service in 2021 in what was widely seen as a move to counter the growing popularity of video-sharing rival TikTok. The platform has since seen a surge in activity, earning more than five trillion views.

Short film distributor Shorts International, which was founded more than two decades earlier in 2000, has complained that the similarity in branding, coupled with the ballooning popularity of YouTube Shorts, has undermined its business.

The British firm said viewing figures on its own YouTube channel “seemed to drop very sharply” following the launch of YouTube Shorts, after which the channel suffered “unexplained deletions” and was “de-monetised” by Google due to purported allegations of copyright violation.

Google has argued that it does not use “Shorts” distinctively and that its use of the word is in accordance with honest practices. The tech giant has said that the word ‘shorts’ used either alone or with other terms have been used extensively descriptively by third parties in the broadcasting, media and telecommunications sectors.

Shorts International has also complained that the comparative difference in production values between its own videos and those shared on YouTube has exacerbated the damage to its brand identity.

“YouTube Shorts’ content is unscripted user-generated content, with no story, shot vertically and usually of low production value,” Shorts International will argue.

“In contrast…Shorts International’s movie catalogue is of the highest quality. It is selected from almost every short film that is being produced globally each year and goes through a careful curation process.

“YouTube Shorts’ content, on the other hand, does not go through any kind of curation process – the algorithm simply highlights videos based on others that a user has liked.”

For its part, Google has denied any knowledge of Shorts International prior to the issue of the legal claim.

But Shorts International has said worked with Google on “numerous projects over the years”,  including on two of Google’s own short films, which were added to Shorts International’s Oscar Nominated Short Films releases in 2015 and 2017, projects which required the involvement of Google’s management and legal team.

Google has been contacted for comment. The trial is set to last up to nine days before a judgement is reached.