4 ms·
So...wouldn't it would be misleading to make hamburgers without ham? What about a turkey burger? It's not beef, but the name implies The subject matter of wha
by codeddesign 11y ago
So...wouldn't it would be misleading to make hamburgers without ham? What about a turkey burger? It's not beef, but the name implies The subject matter of what you are purchasing. Burger is a category just like mayo.
Let's all be clear. They weren't after the naming, they were after preventing potential profit and market loss from a competing product. Because of that, they didn't have the intention of using a moral standard to compete against their new found rival, but we're seeking ways to intentionally harm the product/company.
- Turing_Machine 11y agoNo, because Hamburgers were named after the city of Hamburg in Germany. They have nothing to do with "ham". "They weren't after the naming, they were after preventing potential profit and market loss from a competing product." I noted before that Kraft (certainly a more serious competitor than these people are likely to be) sells both "Mayo" (with eggs) and "Miracle Whip" (without eggs). These rules have been in effect a long time. Miracle Whip was developed in 1933.
- codeddesign 11y agoOk, you got me with the "ham" ;) But seriously...you are completely missing the point that I was making. They weren't after the "Mayo", but after slandering and causing harm to a competitor. If that is your cup of tee, then please feel free to give me your name and company and we can see how it feel's ;) :) The article was completely about the length's of which the company went to in order to "rid" the competition rather than to out-compete it.