Last year, in my post entitled What’s in Your Wallet, a Cafe?, I had this to say about the iconic Capital One tagline:
“Since 2000, Capital One Financial — the nation’s largest direct bank — has been promoting its credit card services by asking What’s in Your Wallet? Three years later it began promoting
Unless you have created a highly stylized, distinctive, graphic representation of a generic designation, perhaps something like the Miller Lite script, don’t bother trying to own or enforce it:
Most likely, you’ll end up regretting the decision to enforce, when the court of public opinion weighs in, after the social media shame-wagon flogs
Just so you know, this is not the post I planned to write today. Hat tip to you, Bo!
It has been exactly one year since Bo Muller-Moore — the “Eat More Kale” guy from Vermont — submitted a comprehensive 71-page response to the registration refusal based on “Eat Mor Chikin” issued by
As Chick-fil-A enters the Twin Cities market, it has begun another creative billboard campaign touting the “End of Burgerz — Koming Soon,” with no sign of the “Eat Mor Chikin” campaign, as of yet anyway. Bo Muller-Moore of Vermont — owner of the “Eat More Kale” trademark — probably would prefer that the
Eating more isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Yeah, I saw the documentary Super Size Me; admittedly, I haven’t viewed certain fast food the same way since, but it all depends on what it is you’re eating, right? Common sense dictates that if it’s good for us, we should eat more of it. Indeed,
The question for the day is not, why did the chicken cross the road, but rather, why did the chicken file an ex parte Letter of Protest with the Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Trademark Examination Policy at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), just a few months ago?
To get to
Yesterday the New York Times ran a story on the “Eat Mor Chikin” v. “Eat More Kale” trademark dispute — the same one we covered a week ago: Eat More Anything?
A couple of quotes from the NY Times article caught my eye:
“In a statement, Chick-fil-A said, ‘We must legally protect and defend
My post from a couple of days ago, commenting on Chick-fil-A’s EAT MOR CHIKIN slogan and the associated Cow Campaign and advertisements, neglected to discuss an issue — one so important — that I’m compelled to raise it now, as it appears to have disturbed my otherwise healthy cognitive system.
It has disturbed me as much as one of my amphibian-loving
An allegation of trademark bullying is in the news again, this time Chick-fil-A is the accused Goliath — charged with overreaching in its enforcement efforts relating to intellectual property rights in the very clever and creative EAT MOR CHIKIN a/k/a The Cow Campaign and advertisements:
Perhaps you’re wondering what aspect of the Cow Campaign Chick-fil-A is seeking to protect?
Perhaps you’re also wondering who David is, right?
Turns out “David” answers to “Bo” and he lives in Vermont, where farmers grow a lot of kale.
I’m told that if we were all to eat more kale, we’d all be more healthy.
There is a lot of protectable intellectual property in Chick-fil-A’s very creative and clever Eat Mor Chikin & Cow Campaign, but trademark infringement allegations relating to Robert “Bo” Muller-Moore’s Eat More Kale slogan appear — to me — to be baseless:
The Burlington Free Press coverage is here, and Seven Days coverage is here.
Anyone out there willing to take Chick-fil-A’s side on this one?Continue Reading Eat More Anything?