Burger King Threatens to Sue Small Vegetarian Snack Company for Using Name Whopper

No, sorry, this isn’t a joke.

They actually have to threaten a vegetarian bar maker. Unbelievable that the word whopper is now owned by Burger King. Amazing how much power corporations have. Can even own words.

Article:

Burger giant crushes bakery with legal threats

http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0200wales/
tm_objectid=17367806%26method=full%26siteid=
50082%26headline=burger%2dgiant%2dcrushes%2d
bakery%2dwith%2dlegal%2dthreats-name_page.html

Jul 12 2006

Darren Devine, Western Mail

THE owner of a small vegetarian snack company yesterday accused bosses at Burger King of "squashing the little guy" after they forced him to change the name of his flapjacks.

The fast food giant threatened Wholebake with legal action after it named its oat-based bars "Whopper!"

Legal experts at Burger King claimed it infringed its trademark and people may believe the vegetarian snack was associated with the fast food chain's Whopper range.

But Mark Gould, managing director of Wholebake, which employs 20 people, said he would not want to be associated with meat products.

He said, "We innocently called the flapjack 'Whopper!' because of its size.

"Wholebake is a totally vege- tarian company and has never had any desire to associate itself with burgers or any other meat products for which Burger King is known.

"We would have liked to have fought these actions all the way, but overriding the points in our favour was the potential of massive costs involved.

"We are a small company based in North Wales - these costs would have been nothing to Burger King but they probably would have cost us our business.

"Once again it's a case of a big company using its financial muscle to squash the little guy."

Burger King claimed that the use of the name "Whopper!" by Wholebake of Corwen infringed its trademark for the name, which is associated with its range of beefburger products.

The fast food chain also claimed the public would believe that Wholebake's vegetarian bars - which are sold in supermarkets and health food shops - were associated with Burger King.

The minimum cost of legal action to defend the name would have been in the region of £20,000, but longer term it could have run into hundreds of thousands of pounds.

The family firm, run by husband and wife team Stephen Jones and Jennifer Gibson, who also live in Corwen, has decided to use the generic term flapjack as the bar's name.

Mr Jones, who along with his wife is a director of the firm, said Burger King "came on very strong" about their intention to protect their brand.

He said "They're the typical tactics of a big American corporation.

"The only other registered users of the name are ones that would have enough money to put up a fight.

"We never really thought anyone could confuse a burger with a flapjack."

The flapjack is one of a range of products manufac- tured by Wholebake, whose biggest-selling product is the 9 Bar.

This sunflower and pumpkin seed bar sells through several major supermarkets inclu-ding Sainsbury's, Tesco and Waitrose.

Legal experts last night said Wholebake's decision to back down was understandable, given the kind of corporate muscle a company like Burger King is able to exercise.

Paul Arthur, a litigation and employment expert with Gwilym Hughes and Partners of Wrexham, said copyright law is a minefield small companies with restricted budgets would do well to avoid.

"If you infringe the trademark of a big company, they will definitely pursue you.

"Burger King do have the trademark on the Whopper so Wholebake will have to seriously reconsider the name of its flapjack.

"No one would confuse a vegetarian bar with a beefburger, but if the trademark is protected Burger King will take action to protect their legal rights.

"A lot is invested in the development of a brand and if it is properly protected it will keep its value."

A spokeswoman for Burger King refused to comment on the case.

Giants versus minnows in the expensive world of copyright law
The Wholebake and Burger King case has echoes of a similar dispute that emerged in 2003 between tiny West Wales clothing firm Howies and giant US jeans manufacturer Levi Strauss & Co.

The American outfit, which at the time employed around 12,000 staff compared with just eight at Howies, said the Welsh firm had infringed its copyright by locating the grey label of its jeans on the back pocket.

The US company first patented the right to the back pocket position in 1938 and the tab trademark is among 11 the company has registered with US authorities.

A company spokesperson said when it notices a brand using one of its trademarks it sends out a cease-and-desist letter as a first step to advise people of what they were doing and ask them to stop.