Weight Watchers Points & Restaurants

[emartin]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

There are a lot of sites online that display Weight Watchers POINTS values for Restaurant food items. I've been wanting to create a site for the WW community where people can enter and maintain restaurant items, nutrition value, and the associated POINTS value.

I realize that Weight Watchers and POINTS are trademarked. I'm assuming that domain names like RestaurantPoints.com (not mine) are not legal?

Is there any legal way for me to create a site with this information, without opening myself up to legal liability? For example, if I do not mention Weight Watchers or the word "points", does that exonerate me from infringement.

I see sites like dwlz.com that list this very information and has been around since 1998. It is a popular site among WW members, but is not endorsed by WW.

I'm just curious as to what my rights are for being able to provide WW POINTS values through a website and if just not using the trademarked terms is protection enough.

 

[xylene]

I realize that Weight Watchers and POINTS are trademarked. I'm assuming that domain names like RestaurantPoints.com (not mine) are not legal?

Why do you assume it is not legal. If ypur sites content does not infringe on WW intellectual property, then points just means ratings.

Is there any legal way for me to create a site with this information, without opening myself up to legal liability? For example, if I do not mention Weight Watchers or the word "points", does that exonerate me from infringement.

If you don't infringe then it is legal.

I'm just curious as to what my rights are for being able to provide WW POINTS values through a website and if just not using the trademarked terms is protection enough.

The point system is WW intellectual property.

If other WW fans sites infringe, that does not mean anything for your sites legal status.

The points and how they are computed and the like are WW intellectual property.

 

[emartin]

Thanks for your response.

Why do you assume it is not legal.

Because it is using the word points, which is trademarked by WW. To me, points is a general term, but if it is used to describe the WW value, I'm guessing that is not OK. I'm more than happy to be wrong

If you don't infringe then it is legal.

I guess I'm looking for clarification on what would constitute infringement. Can I say the values listed on my site are points or WW points?

The point system is WW intellectual property.

If other WW fans sites infringe, that does not mean anything.

The points and how they are computer and the like are WW intellectual property.

I realize that others doing it does not make it OK, which is why I'm asking here If my site does not calculate the points and only comes from members entering the value, I assume there is no infringement?

Thanks again for your feedback.

 

[xylene]

Because it is using the word points, which is trademarked by WW. To me, points is a general term, but if it is used to describe the WW value, I'm guessing that is not OK. I'm more than happy to be wrong

If you are using points, in the content of the site to refer to WW points, that is infringing. the web url restaurantpoints.com is not in itself infringing,

I guess I'm looking for clarification on what would constitute infringement. Can I say the values listed on my site are points or WW points?

You can't say WW points and you cant say 'points' if you mean points that represent a derived value of calorie to fat to fiber ratio. (a ww point...)

I realize that others doing it does not make it OK, which is why I'm asking here If my site does not calculate the points and only comes from members entering the value, I assume there is no infringement?

Relying on user created content as a shield from lawsuits is a paper thin one.

 

[proud_parent]

Relying on user created content as a shield from lawsuits is a paper thin one.

Considering the topic, I *so* wanted you to write "wafer thin".

 

[emartin]

If you are using points, in the content of the site to refer to WW points, that is infringing. the web url restaurantpoints.com is not in itself infringing

What if restaurantpoints.com has information about ww points, but does not mention ww or points other than in the domain name?

You can't say WW points and you cant say 'points' if you mean points that represent a derived value of calorie to fat to fiber ratio. (a ww point...)

Understood.

Relying on user created content as a shield from lawsuits is a paper thin one.

I guess there are two issues, 1) the calculation of points and 2) the displaying of points.

What if the site does not calculate points and does not refer to the "value" as points?

Bottom line, is there a scenario where I can have a community of ww users enter and retrieve ww points values for restaurant food items? Even if I don't mentioned ww or points, does that provide enough "protection"?

 

[FlyingRon]

To throw a further monkey wrench into things, the point formula has a patent (stupid as that is).

Even if you're not using their formula, they have a registered mark for "Providing weight reduction planning, treatment and supervision through weight reduction programs featuring counseling, creating diet regimes, and discussions; providing advice, consultation and information in the field of weight control and nutrition."

Doesn't matter if you use their formula or not.

 

[emartin]

To throw a further monkey wrench into things, the point formula has a patent (stupid as that is).

Even if you're not using their formula, they have a registered mark for "Providing weight reduction planning, treatment and supervision through weight reduction programs featuring counseling, creating diet regimes, and discussions; providing advice, consultation and information in the field of weight control and nutrition."

Doesn't matter if you use their formula or not.

Sorry, but I'm not exactly sure what you are stating. Are you saying that displaying a "value" no matter how it's labeled or entered, is a violation? Or is it only an issue with the inference that it is a WW POINTS value? Or am I missing your point entirely

 

[xylene]

Sorry, but I'm not exactly sure what you are stating. Are you saying that displaying a "value" no matter how it's labeled or entered, is a violation? Or is it only an issue with the inference that it is a WW POINTS value? Or am I missing your point entirely

That is exactly what we have been saying

It is definitely NOT OK to refer to WW points, even if you are not listing WW point content of specific restaurant entrees

It is NOT OK to calculate or publish the calorie / fat / fiber ratio of food using the weight watchers formula. No matter what the end result is called, "points" "values" "units".

Weight watchers points is their trademark and the formula for calculating these for food is their intellectual property.

 

[FlyingRon]

Sorry, but I'm not exactly sure what you are stating. Are you saying that displaying a "value" no matter how it's labeled or entered, is a violation? Or is it only an issue with the inference that it is a WW POINTS value? Or am I missing your point entirely

You can't use the term POINTS with regard to dieting without running afoul of the trademark.

You can't calculate the "point value" and display that without running afoul of the patent.

 

[emartin]

You can't use the term POINTS with regard to dieting without running afoul of the trademark.

You can't calculate the "point value" and display that without running afoul of the patent.

Understood. It sounds like regardless of how the point value is calculated or labeled, I can't have a site that maintains that information.

It's too bad, it would be very useful for WW members. There are already plenty of sites that do it, I guess they just don't post big enough threat. I'm very surprised that dwlz.com is still running, they are a very popular website in the WW community and they maintain restaurant items point values

 

[xylene]

the actual point formula is not that complex.

the real problem is the lack of nutritional info for most restaurants.

 

[FlyingRon]

the actual point formula is not that complex.

the real problem is the lack of nutritional info for most restaurants.

Calories / 50
+ grams of fat / 12
- grams of fiber (to a max of 4) / 5

The neat thing about patents is the invention is disclosed.

The real issue is that WW sells the restaurant guide as a feature of their (for $$$) online site.

 

[emartin]

Their "old" formula is the one that can be found online in their patent. My understanding is that they have a newer formula.

Either way, I agree that finding and maintaining the nutrition information is the most difficult aspect of the site.

Maybe I'll just focus on that and forget about the points

 

[FlyingRon]

Their "old" formula is the one that can be found online in their patent. My understanding is that they have a newer formula.

Either way, I agree that finding and maintaining the nutrition information is the most difficult aspect of the site.

Maybe I'll just focus on that and forget about the points

My wife's been on weight watchers for years. I don't think the point formula has changed at all. She has a very recent point calculating slide rule thing and it appears the same.

What they have done is add a new "simplified" plan that doesn't use points for a majority of the meals because even with food marked outright with points, counting to numbers that require the average member to remove their shoes to do hasn't been that practical.