McDonald's McIre directed towards a girl ...

[IDrinkaRum]

who dared to trademark her charity (which helps out Special Olympics) because her charity has the letters "Mc" in the name

Lauren McClusky, 19, held "McFests" in the Chicago area to raise money for the Chicago Special Olympics. In 2007 and 2008, Ms. McClusky and another person who co-chaired the McFest charity raising (and the person also had a "Mc" last name) raised $30,000 for the Special Olympics. When Ms. McClusky chose to trademark the name "McFest", McDonald's lawyers chose at that time to stop her as they say McDonalds owns most of what they term "McFamily brands" (the list of such words is in the article).

Is McDonalds out of their mind or should Ms. McClusky be forced to change the name of the money-raising-for-charity-events something else?



(Sorry if this is disjointed, but my blood sugar's low & I'm wigged out on pain meds & ear infection meds ).

[jackfaire]

I am going to have to back McDonald's on this one. Hell every term that starts with Mc anything people associate with McDonald's. This charity would also be associated with them in people's minds.

The only reason I think people will rush to her side is because of the David and Goliath effect. People love to see the corporation as the bad guys regardless of if they are right or not.

[Vagabond]

Like Jackfaire said McAnything is usually associated with McD's. I don't know why the girl wouldn't settle for the "McD's sponsors McFest".
<from article>
McClusky hopes for a truce that will allow her to keep the McFest name. Still, she's unwilling to make a corporate sponsorship tradeoff along the lines of "McDonald's Presents McFest." For their part, McDonald's representatives maintained that they have no desire to squash McClusky's charitable efforts, and desire an "amicable resolution." </end>

I'd go with the sponsorship. Seems like an 'amicable resolution'.

However, unless you have the famous arches or colors, or are trying to sell burgers and fries - they really aren't intruding on McDonald's territory. And, hell, it's for charity anyway, which McDonalds supports.
So... would McDonald's next try to just trademark the 'Mc' and sue or make people named 'Mc....' change their name? Makes me wonder how far they would go?

[jackfaire]

So... would McDonald's next try to just trademark the 'Mc' and sue or make people named 'Mc....' change their name? Makes me wonder how far they would go?

Say people have an issue with a charity that "bears their name" and decide to sue McDonald's for actions that have nothing to do with them because of an inconvenient similarity of name.

[Vagabond]

Oh. Haven't heard of that one. But I don't follow the news.

[jackfaire]

Oh. Haven't heard of that one. But I don't follow the news.

There was a legal battle over a name because people who were trying to get a subscription to Oprah's magazine ended up suscribing to a magazine of a more devious nature that though it predated her publication was forced to give up it's name because Oprah's was too similar.

[Vagabond]

Now I think THAT is unfair! If you came out first, and did all the stuff to substantiate your claim on your name - I think you ought to get first dibs.
bloody Oprah...

[jackfaire]

Now I think THAT is unfair! If you came out first, and did all the stuff to substantiate your claim on your name - I think you ought to get first dibs.
bloody Oprah...

The decision was based on which was more popular. I agree timing should have been used.

It illustrates though the importance of different names otherwise confusion arises if I am contributing to McFeats I assume I am giving to a McDonald's funded charity.

Another angle. I trust a charitable organization to put my money in the right hands. Along comes another Charity with a similar name or a name that implies a connection that abuses the funds I give them.

I just gave them a ton of money I wanted to go to another organization and I could sue them for misrepresenting themselves and have a legitimate case.

[Vagabond]

According to the article the 'McFest' sign/symbol looked different, I don't know how different, they only said Different style 'M' and different colors. McDonalds, being a big company, I'm sure would have splashed their famous arches over everything to let you know it was the real deal.
However, I'm sure you could have asked if they were sponsored by McDonalds. Hopefully, you would have received an honest answer.

But, yes, McDonalds is more popular/well-known that McFest. But the fact that they've been doing that for 2 years prior without McDonalds doing/saying anything about it, raises an eyebrow.

I think getting sponsored by McDonalds would be an amicable solution. The money raised goes to the Charity, which they are both supporters of.
But then, I could also see McDonalds setting up all kinds of rules/restrictions that McClusky may not want to follow, or have the means to follow.

[Cats]

While I will say the name is kinda on the iffy side, she did say there was a reason she did it, and I think McDonald's just has their head too far up their own ass. Just because something is more famous, does not necessarily mean it's better or the boss. Mc -prefix names are common enough, and plenty of charities are named after people's names, why should someone be punished because they share 2 letters with a well known corporation? Does that mean every undergound transit system need to change their names and can no longer be a "subway" because a sandwich chain has a trademark to that name?

[jackfaire]

Does that mean every undergound transit system need to change their names and can no longer be a "subway" because a sandwich chain has a trademark to that name?

No reasonably intelligent person would assume from hearing about the NY city subway that it was associated with Subway Restaurants. Hearing about a McCharity however one's first assumption would be that it is associated with McDonald's

[Cats]

No reasonably intelligent person would assume from hearing about the NY city subway that it was associated with Subway Restaurants. Hearing about a McCharity however one's first assumption would be that it is associated with McDonald's

I was getting more at the principle of the matter and trying to make a comparassin to show my point. I was not making a literal reference.

First assumptions are one thing, yes, but if the charity has a diclaimer saying it's not associated with McDonalds (which I think they should do), then it's no longer their fault if people don't want to read the fine print.

[Boozy]

"Mc" anything is clearly and strongly associated with McDonald's. They have to protect the "Mc" name in order to protect and maintain control over their brand. Someone hears "McFest" and plenty of people (possibly the majority) will assume that it is a McDonald's-run charity.

In fact, I have a feeling that this girl's choice of "McFest" was due to the fact that the "Mc" prefix had already been successfully branded. In a world without McDonald's, it would sound like a terribly stupid name to our ears.

[Lace Neil Singer]

I don't see why she doesn't just take the sponsership. Her charity would get more publicity, and therefore more money. What she's doing now seems to me like cutting off her nose to spite her face.

[Fryk]

I think it has to do with Ms McKlusky not wanting to lose control of her charity to the corporate sponsors. It's her baby, and she wants to keep it that way.