In 1998 I discovered German giant Deutsche Telekom was applying for the rights to use our company’s names, Telecom One and Telecom 1. My first reaction was to protect what both my team and I had worked so hard to build, and felt rightfully belonged to us.

This made me seek legal advice in an attempt to determine our position. Even though any legal dispute is an expensive undertaking – it cost us £100,000 over three-and-a-half years and you are only awarded costs for the day’s hearing in trademark cases – I felt very strongly that we deserved to hold onto the name. Attempting to re-establish ourselves under a different name would have negated all the hard work we had done. As Deutsche Telekom refused to negotiate, I realised a lengthy legal battle was inevitable.

When I set up Telecom One in 1997, I was advised that the company’s name was too generic to register. Indeed I think it was this characteristic that was Deutsche Telekom’s motivation.

The trademark dispute began in October 1998. As a small start-up company, the trading we had done in the first year was modest, but we were gradually becoming known in the telecoms industry and this was important for our case.

I chose to get the best legal advice the company could afford, so I appointed Steptoe and Johnson, which in turn employed one of the UK’s top trademark barristers to defend us. It was important for us to work closely with our legal team, so we were kept up-to-date with every aspect of the case. This was an immensely time-consuming process; finding old correspondence and remembering the chronology of events from five years ago was certainly a challenge.

Overall, it was a slow process with letters from lawyers changing hands throughout. We never had any direct contact with Deutsche Telekom, but I was increasingly aware this dispute was not its top priority. To such a large business, it was perhaps trivial, but to us it was a huge undertaking.

I was careful to ensure the day-to-day running of the business was not disrupted. Thankfully, the situation didn’t affect our progression within the industry, and our customers continued to receive the high quality standards they had come to expect. However, focusing on the company’s future was difficult as the uncertainty of the outcome was a constant concern.

The final court hearing in the Patent Office arrived in September 2003, and I was keen to attend to see the dispute through to its conclusion. Throughout the legal wranglings it was clear, as a young company, we needed to establish that we had built up ‘goodwill’ towards our name before Deutsche Telekom applied for the trademarks. Usual goodwill measures – based on how the public perceives the company – were difficult for us to prove. Telecom One was still relatively unknown by the general public, but as we had built up a reputation within our niche, by registering with Oftel and establishing links with other service providers, the Patent Office ruled in our favour and Deutsche Telekom chose not to appeal.

All of us at Telecom One are proud that we fought the battle and came out victorious, although if we’d known how the costs would mount up we may have thought twice. After all, a young company with slower growth could have been crippled by it. In order to ensure nothing like this happens again, we are in the process of registering with the European Office for Harmonisation in the International Market, to secure our name across Europe.

The past five years have been extremely costly for the company, but it has been worth the fight. What is, perhaps, most beneficial is that the case has set a precedent for other smaller companies who are faced with a similar problem. For me personally, it has undoubtedly been a useful learning experience. For Telecom One and myself it represents an enormous achievement.

Patrick Naughton launched Telecom One in 1997. It turns over £25m by selling ISP, mobile phone and telephone services. It also runs two interactive television channels – the Dating Channel and GayDate TV.