
McDonald's loses Big Mac trademark after legal battle with Irish chain - gballan
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/15/mcdonalds-loses-big-mac-trademark-legal-battle-supermacs
======
socalnate1
I've read several articles about this and I can't for the life of me
understand why: "McDonald’s had not proven genuine use of Big Mac, which it
trademarked in 1996, as a burger or restaurant name."

The dispute with Supermac's is another matter; but I just can't fathom
McDonalds's being told that it didn't prove it's use of "Big Mac" as a burger
name.

Maybe someone better versed in European IP law can help?

~~~
pedrocx486
I saw this on a thread on Reddit:

>The lawyers _royally_ fucked up.

>All they had to do was provide proof that McDonalds _sells_ Big Macs. Their
evidence was signed affidavits by high ranking board members, advertisements,
a Wikipedia entry and a few others of a similar vein.

>Problem was they failed to provide any evidence that McDonalds actually
_sells_ Big Macs, just that Big Macs _exist_ and judges _really_ don’t like
“everybody knows” being treated as evidence.

~~~
vertline3
"All they had to do was provide proof that McDonalds sells Big Macs."

I still think that seems odd. Seems the judge can say "I need proof these are
sold" and force them to show weekly sales receipts?

