Absurd Copyright Lawsuits Filed by Big Companies

Big companies will be aware of the power they have. with copyright lawsuits It manages to annoy other companies. An interesting picture emerges from the sometimes strange copyright lawsuits filed by these giant companies.

In other words, in the chaos of the business world, the competition of giant companies is not limited to the quality of products or services. When it comes to copyright, big companies sometimes target their big competitors like themselves, and sometimes they target small companies that we don’t even know exist. As a result, we are presented with a ridiculous topic. your legal battle All that remains is to watch.

For example, Facebook went to court to register the word “face”.

In the lawsuit filed by Facebook, “face” He won the rights of this word by court decision, claiming that the word was now integrated with the brand name.

As a result of this decision, the word “face” in the field of telecommunication services Use by other brands prohibited.

American retail giant Walmart claimed that the smiley face symbol belonged to it.

Walmart, which filed a lawsuit in 2006 over the now-classic yellow smiley face symbol, that it belongs to him He tried to register this design by saying:

So much so that the brand sued artist Charles Smith for imitating the smiley face symbol. But the court said that this symbol belonged to the public. He ruled against Walmart.

McDonald’s also went to court and claimed that the “Mc” suffix belonged to it.

“Mc” and “Mac” suffixes Claiming that it integrates with its brand, McDonald’s applied to the court several times to register these supplements.

McDonald’s filed a lawsuit against the restaurant named McCurry in Malaysia in 2006. he had lost.

Later, McDonald’s filed a similar copyright lawsuit against Supermac’s, an Irish company, twice. The court ruled that McDonald’s only for certain products He stated that he could register it.

So these cases are also It ended against McDonald’s.

An “app store” war broke out between Amazon and Apple.

Amazon has its own app store similar to Apple “app store” Two giants were sued in 2011 because they presented it under the name.

Apple, which sued Amazon, claimed that the “app store” name belonged to it and this situation was taken to court. Amazon is the originator of the word “app store”, which means “application store”. It is suitable for general use He was defending.

Later Apple withdrew the lawsuit it filed.

Instagram filed a lawsuit against the application called Littergram due to the similarity of names.

litter problem in the UK The application called Littergram, which aims to address the problem, emerged as a non-profit project.

Disturbed by the similarity of names, Instagram first filed a lawsuit against this application to change its name, but later this withdrew the case.

Starbucks seems to have adopted the word “buck” because it filed a lawsuit against a small coffee shop called Sambucks.

Sambuck’s, a small coffee shop opened by a person named Sam Buck, was on the radar of the coffee giant Starbucks and due to naming rights This situation was taken to court.

Although Sam Buck claimed that this name was his personal name, the court in favor of Starbucks decided and argued that all expressions containing the word “buck” should be removed from the business.

Subway wanted to embrace the term “footlong” it used for its sandwiches.

Subway uses the word “one foot long” to describe its 12-inch sandwiches around the world. To register the term “footlong” appeals to the court.

Because of this attempt, he argued that the term “footlong” is a general term. Pizza Hut, KFC and Casey’s Subway, which has disputes with brands such as, is also suing these brands.

The court said that this term was a generic term. against Subway decides.

Harley-Davidson tried to patent the sound of its motorcycles but failed.

The brand applied to patent this sound, saying that the sound made by its motorcycles was special, but this request was not met by other motorcycle brands. He reacted.

Other brands tried to prevent Harley-Davidson’s initiative by claiming that their motorcycles made the same or similar sound. They will have been successful because Harley-Davidson withdrew the application.

Yours most interesting Which trademark case did you find?

Our other content that may interest you: