• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Fast Food Logo Trademark

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.



vonkal

Junior Member
Yes, clearly they wouldn’t be happy about it, as they hate the term “fast food”, but my question is, could it likely be successfully defended? With a parody, satire, or other defense for example.
 
Last edited:

FlyingRon

Senior Member
No, there's no parody or satire defense, that's a copyright thing, and besides you aren't doing either parody or satire, but coopting their logo for your own commercial use. You're intentionally diluting their famous mark, and if they decide to pursue it, you'll lose in any number of ways.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Yes, clearly they wouldn’t be happy about it, as they hate the term “fast food”, but my question is, could it likely be successfully defended? With a parody, satire, or other defense for example.
It's not a matter of whether it can be defended...it's a matter of "...at what cost can it be defended?"

How much money do you have?
 

vonkal

Junior Member
Thanks FlyingRon. While I appreciate your point of view, I wonder why you think this is for commercial use? This is for a discussion board about fast food, a very controversial subject and will generate no money.

You are correct that I am not making fun of them as in the case of satire, but there is no other symbol that better represents the fast food industry,

A parody is a work created to mock, comment on, or make fun at an original work, its subject, author, style, or some other target, by means of humorous, satiric or ironic imitation.

It seems if this is the definition, it could apply in this instance.

Zigner, I understand that a defense would cost money, but what I really want to know is could it likely be defended successfully?
 

justalayman

Senior Member
but there is no other symbol that better represents the fast food industry,
so, you mean that your logo is intentionally designed so a person would connect your logo with the McDonalds "Golden Arches".

That statement alone should give you a huge clue as to the use being allowed or not. You have already stated it is not for parody so that clears that defense.

comment on, or make fun at an original work, its subject, author, style, or some other target, by means of humorous, satiric or ironic imitation.
your claimed use does not meet any of those requirements to be considered parody.


So, now you have a logo that intentionally takes from the McDonalds logo, with intent to bring McD's to mind.

Sure sounds like infringement to me.

and of course, regardless of it being an actual infringement or not doesn't mean much unless you are willing to be prepared to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend your use.

I hear the guy in Malaysia finally won with his McCurry. It only took about 8 years to win. Personally (and I'm not a McD's fan) I think the guy should have lost.
 

vonkal

Junior Member
Perhaps this forum is tolerant of controversial discussions, so I hope you will not take my comments as an argument, but as a thoughtful discussion.

Would any of you like to help me understand how this site has gotten away with using a McD’s look-alike logo for over 10 years? And they were involved with one of the most famous McDonalds lawsuits in history (but not about their logo).

The McLibel Trial

It seems that this logo is much closer to the trademark than what I am suggesting.

Also, perhaps what you are saying is that my logo isn’t making fun of, or is not a parody on their logo in itself, even though the forum contents would be. If that’s the case, perhaps you could comment on this logo and tell me if it would pass the test and if it would be considered an infringement?

http://forum.fastfood.com/images/itskillinus2.jpg

Thanks
 

justalayman

Senior Member
vonkal;2660080]


It seems that this logo is much closer to the trademark than what I am suggesting.
sure is. You would have to ask McDonalds. I would think it would be.


Also, perhaps what you are saying is that my logo isn’t making fun of, or is not a parody on their logo in itself, even though the forum contents would be. If that’s the case, perhaps you could comment on this logo and tell me if it would pass the test and if it would be considered an infringement?

http://forum.fastfood.com/images/itskillinus2.jpg



from some other site:

Satire is, basically, a word used to describe works of art, including (and especially) literature, which is designed to ridicule and, often, parody.
Definition of PARODY

1
: a literary or musical work in which the style of an author or work is closely imitated for comic effect or in ridicule
is not the picture one that ridicules or is imitated for comic effect?
 

FlyingRon

Senior Member
Thanks FlyingRon. While I appreciate your point of view, I wonder why you think this is for commercial use? This is for a discussion board about fast food, a very controversial subject and will generate no money.
Whether it makes you money, it will be viewed as such. You're putting yoru site out to the public.
It seems if this is the definition, it could apply in this instance.
As I stated, you don't get a free pass on trademarks just because you claim it is parody. As I stated, while you've made a parody use of it, your use isn't a work of parody but a dilution of their mark for your own non-parody business purposes.

You'll lose.
Depending on how your ISP reads the law, your site may go poof even without a court case.

Even with all the lawyers in the world, I don't think you'll prevail. McD's does have all the lawyers in the world.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top