| ▲ | applfanboysbgon an hour ago | |
They did not settle, hence my usage of the wording "ruling" and "forced to change". > For the reasons given the Court finds and concludes that (1) McDonald's is entitled to enforce its family of marks that are characterized by the combination of the prefix "Mc" with a generic word; (2) the name McSleep Inn is likely to cause an appreciable number of the public to be confused by believing that McSleep Inn is sponsored, associated, affiliated, connected, or endorsed by McDonald's; and (3) the adoption and use by Quality International of the name McSleep Inn was a deliberate attempt to benefit by the good will and reputation of McDonald's. Therefore, the Court will find trademark infringement, unfair competition, and dilution under the Illinois statute (Ill.Rev.Stat. Ch. 140, § 22). https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/6... I suppose it's not surprising that Europe is less favorable to frivolous trademark claims made by American corporations than America is. | ||