yay for Mc Curry!!!

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/malaysias-mccurry-beats-mcdonalds-over-trademark-20090908-ffly.html

just shows that any of us davids can defeat such goliaths like mc donald’s!

still think the court should have made mc donald’s pay more than $2000 in costs since they’ve already got enough money as it is…

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia-pacific/2009/09/20099853733530827.html

McDonald’s loses McCurry battle

Tuesday, September 08, 2009
11:36 Mecca time, 08:36 GMT

A small curry shop in Malaysia has won an eight-year battle against global fast-food giant McDonalds over the name of its restaurant.

The court ruling on Tuesday in favour of the McCurry restaurant, based in Malaysia’s largest city, Kuala Lumpur, effectively ends McDonald’s legal bid to retain exclusive use of the “Mc” prefix in Malaysia.

The ruling by Malaysia’s highest court denied McDonald’s request to appeal against another court’s verdict that allowed McCurry to use the prefix.

In a precedent-setting unanimous decision the court said there was no evidence that McCurry was passing off McDonald’s business as its own.

The court on Tuesday also ordered McDonald’s to pay $2,900 in costs to McCurry, which its owners say is short for “Malaysian Chicken Curry”.

“We are very much relieved. We hope to expand. This is what we wanted to do from the beginning and we were stalled for eight years,” said P Suppiah, the owner of McCurry.

“I am so happy … we have nothing in similarity with them at all. That’s how we have felt all this while,” said his wife and co-owner, Kanageswary.

In an emailed statement to Al Jazeera, a spokesman for McDonalds said: “We respect the finding of the court and beyond that have no further comment.”

Protracted battle

A court of appeal panel had ruled in favour of McCurry in April, when it overturned a 2006 high court ruling that had gone in favour of McDonald’s.

That April ruling, supported by the federal court, said McCurry’s logo and signboard were substantially different from McDonald’s red and yellow “M” logo popularly known as the golden arches.

It also said that as McCurry served only Indian food it was not competing with McDonald’s Western menu.

McDonald’s, which began operations in Malaysia in 1982 and has 185 outlets in the country, first sued McCurry in 2001.

Sri Devi Nair, the lawyer for McCurry, said the ruling means McDonald’s does not have a monopoly on the prefix “Mc”, and that other restaurants could also use it as long as they distinguish their food from McDonald’s.

“This is a precedent for everyone to follow,” he said.

Source: Al Jazeera and agencies

Advertisements

~ by nursheikha on September 9, 2009.

One Response to “yay for Mc Curry!!!”

  1. The recent McDonald’s v. McCurry ruling is not surprising. Just by the three main DuPont factors alone, appearance, sound and meaning, these two marks are arguably not confusingly similar. Add to that the difference in menus, and the difference in trade dress, and you have a pretty strong case for McCurry, which the panel seemingly accepted. The letters “Mc” cannot be totally, exclusively owned by one entity worldwide. And it’s not as if people are going to mix up McCurry with McDonalds. Now, if McCurry used the golden arches, had a clown and similar characters associated with the restaurant, that would be problematic. Those elements were not present in this case. On our site, http://www.trademarksprotected.com, we help with these trademark issues and any trademark questions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: