Wednesday, September 9, 2009

US' McDonald's loses trademark fight against Malaysian McCurry

PUTRAJAYA: US fast food giant McDonald’s lost an eight-year trademark battle to prevent local restaurant
McCurry from using the ‘Mc’ prefix in a precedent-setting judgment by Malaysia’s highest court.

The Federal Court ruled Tuesday that McDonald’s cannot appeal against another court’s verdict that had allowed McCurry to use ‘Mc’ in its name. The owner says McCurry, which serves Indian food, is an abbreviation for Malaysian Chicken Curry.

The ruling by a three-member panel of the Federal Court ends all legal avenues for McDonald’s to protect its name from what it said was a trademark infringement.

File pic shows McCurry restaurant owner, P. Suppiah, putting the 'c' back onto the signboard of his shop on April 30 after winning the earlier court case. The simple gesture marked the end of an eight-year David and Goliath court case against US fastfood giant McDonalds to keep the name of his Indian restaurant located on Jalan Ipoh. Starpic by Ibrahim Mohtar

“On the basis of unanimous decision, our view is that” McDonald’s plea to carry the case forward has no merit, said chief judge Arifin Zakaria. “It is unfortunate that we have to dismiss the application with costs,” he said.

McDonald’s will have to pay RM10,000 to McCurry, a popular eatery in Jalan Ipoh on the edge of Kuala Lumpur’s downtown. McDonald’s lawyers refused to comment, except to say the company will abide by the judgment.

McCurry lawyer Sri Devi Nair 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.

A view of the McCurry shop. - Star file pic

A three-member Appeal Court panel had ruled in favour of McCurry Restaurant in April this year when it overturned a 2006 high court ruling that had upheld McDonald’s contention.

Arifin said McDonald’s lawyers were unable to point out faults in the Appeal Court judgment, which had said there was no evidence to show that McCurry was passing off McDonald’s business as its own. The Appeals Court also said McDonald’s cannot claim an exclusive right to the ‘Mc’ prefix in the country.

McDonald’s asked the Federal Court for permission to appeal against that decision but was denied Tuesday.

“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 A.M.S.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, Kanageswary Suppiah.

The Appeal Court said McCurry’s signboard has white and grey letters against a red background with a picture of a smiling chicken giving a double thumbs-up, in contrast to McDonald’s red and yellow “M” logo. McCurry also serves only Indian food, not competing with McDonald’s Western menu, the court said.

McDonald’s began operations in Malaysia in 1982 and has 137 outlets in the country.

*Taken from The Star Online

Related posts you may want to read



5 comments:

~dolly~ said...

Hmmm.. actly I don’t think there is a argument point in the first place..
Heheheheh… don’t know la…
My thought…

Johnny Ong said...

his lawyer will be famous also

wan hafiz said...

dolly: may b mcdonalds think it own every mc's. i wonder what this verdict will impact to other food. may be mc lemang afterwards?

Johnny Ong: he won the case against mcdonalds. how bout mcdonalds' lawyers?

rbaron said...

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.

wan hafiz said...

rbaron: thanks for your fact. personally i think, there should not be a problem cause, i dont think McD will have curry in its menu.

now, McCurry is famous. What a victory for McCurry