> because McDonald’s had argued that similarity between Big Mac and Supermac would confuse customers
What's more ridiculous is McDonalds trademarked the name of a competitors (arguably) flagship product - which they(McD) never used:
> “They trademarked the SnackBox, which is one of Supermac’s most popular products, even though the product is not actually offered by them,” said McDonagh. “The EU is basically saying either use it or lose it.”
I guess I would need to see the decision. I think a "Big Mac" is a fairly known thing. There even is a Big Mac inflation index, because of how uniform they are.
Edit: I guess it is a purchasing power parity index.
Readit News
I don't think anyone accidentally walks into their store thinking it's McDonald's.
https://goo.gl/images/KqX3tJ
I mean look at this.
Mcd can always hit back with a lawsuit if there is evidence I'd credible deceptive after practice.
> because McDonald’s had argued that similarity between Big Mac and Supermac would confuse customers
What's more ridiculous is McDonalds trademarked the name of a competitors (arguably) flagship product - which they(McD) never used:
> “They trademarked the SnackBox, which is one of Supermac’s most popular products, even though the product is not actually offered by them,” said McDonagh. “The EU is basically saying either use it or lose it.”
I can't possibly imagine why McDonalds would be litigating against this chain!
Edit: I guess it is a purchasing power parity index.
The data is on github: https://github.com/TheEconomist/big-mac-data
Deleted Comment