http://www.openforum.com/articles/why-is-a-fast-food-giant-going-after-a-one-man-business/ http://www.economist.com/node/21551090
Chick-Fil-A is trying to force Bo Muller-Moore of Vermont to stop selling "Eat More Kale" t-shirts because they claim the phrase infringes upon their "Eat Mor Chikin" slogan. Seems they have also gone after slogans as innocuous as "Eat More Produce" or "Eat More Goat" more than 30 times.
Now, I'm all for defense of intellectual property, but face it, "Eat More ...." is hardly a unique string of english words, and should only be protected in combination with other visual or contextual elements. If Mr. Muller-Moore included images of Tomatos holding up "Eat More Kale" signs then I could stretch far enough to believe he might be trying to profit off of an association with Chick-Fil-A, but that is not the case here. I could even see it if he opened up a fast food Kale restaurant, but that's not the case either.
How many times did each of us hear our mom's tell us that we needed to "eat more vegetables" when we were growing up? I bet you couldn't count em... yet these did not infringe upon Chick-Fil-A's marketing strategy.
This sounds a lot like when Harley Davidson tried to patent and trademark the "potAto potAto potAto" sound made by their V-twin engines several years ago. Had Harley won, no other motorcycle engine manufacturer could have produced a V-twin engine without paying Harley a royalty since the distinctive sound is a mechanical result of the V-twin engine design. Fortunately Harley lost and thousands of Hondas, Yamahas Suzukis and other motorcycles can sound like potahto potahto potahto without forking over extortion money to Harley.
Trademark protection using common english words or phrases must be narrowly construed and should only apply in the market segment occupied by the trademark holder. Chick-Fil-A going after this guy would be like Microsoft going after a window repair company because their slogan is "We do Windows!" Microsoft has successfully prevented certain companies from using "Windows" but most of these cases were clear attempts by competitors in their market segment to infringe on both the word "Windows" and the associated interface, imagery and/or graphics (especially ironic since Microsoft stole "windows" from Apple in the first place).
Last edited by MRRiley; 11-26-2012 at 12:55 PM.