This afternoon on NPR there was a segment highlighting Vermont artist Bo Muller-Moore; he's engaged in a legal battle with Chick-Fil-A over his use of the phrase Eat More Kale. Apparently, his simple screen-printed t-shirt slogan infringes on the company's rights to its slogan (and the subsequent trademark...); Bo is on the record noting that apparently the folks over at Chick-Fil-A can't determine the difference between kale and chicken, he even goes so far as to give some basic education during his soundbite.
After raptly listening to Bo's segment, I fired up Google so I could find out a bit more about Chick-Fil-A (not being from the South I'd never even heard of them...), observing a few of their ads on the web. I have to admit, seeing cows trying to sell me chicken is unsettling; even now I am envisioning a counter-campaign headed by upstart bantams, wielding miniature picket signs and making use of the chicken microphone.
Peanut gallery questions?
a) When I Google "Eat More Chicken" does Chick-Fil-A get a penny every time I execute my search?
b) If, in conversation or writing I utter/scribe, "Eat More (insert noun here)," am I in danger of enduring legal action?
c) Has copyright & trademark law become so broad that it now covers phrasing that is substantially different from the original? I could understand problems with Eat More Chickens or Eat More Schicken; but I'm quite sure few people can confuse kale with the aforementioned animal protein.
d) Which came first, the chicken or the kale?
No comments:
Post a Comment