3 ms·

IAAL. This list is not really complete, but you are wrong because doordash doesn't use in-n-out's logo. They use an imitation logo. Otherwise, they use only t

IAAL. This list is not really complete, but you are wrong because doordash doesn't use in-n-out's logo. They use an imitation logo. Otherwise, they use only text, which falls under nominative fair use. The only question is one of "are they suggesting sponsorship or endorsement by the trademark holder". The answer is "maybe". But that's easy to solve, put a note at the top that says that deliveries are performed by doordash, and not by the merchant. Note: This is all just about the logo question. There are other issues like "control over your brand", etc. But they would not be covered by a logo lawsuit ;-)

crabasa 11y ago
Can you provide any links to more information on "imitation logos"? I'm completely fascinated that this is even a thing, because the entire point of a logo is to communicate the identity of a company visually to a consumer. The idea of a logo that visually communicates "In-N-Out" but isn't technically In-N-Out is super bizarre to me.
- DannyBee 11y ago
  Ugh. I was going to link you to the doordash version of the logo, but they pulled it all from their site. The purpose of the logo is mainly to make the site not look weird. Since they use logos for everything else, having this huge blank space would look odd. So they shoved something there. As for the legality, under things like nominative fair use, doordash can only use as little of the trademark as necessary to identify to consumers. In this case, that is likely the words but not the symbol. So if they actually used the symbol, they would be in trouble. (In essence, in-n-out will argue this both ways. They will argue using a fake logo dilutes their brand, and that doordash can't use their logo if doordash tries)
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > I was going to link you to the doordash version of the logo, but they pulled it all from their site. The DoorDash version is in this article: http://www.tmz.com/2015/11/11/in-n-out-lawsuit/ http://www.tmz.com/2015/11/11/in-n-out-lawsuit/

crabasa 11y ago

Can you provide any links to more information on "imitation logos"? I'm completely fascinated that this is even a thing, because the entire point of a logo is to communicate the identity of a company visually to a consumer. The idea of a logo that visually communicates "In-N-Out" but isn't technically In-N-Out is super bizarre to me.

DannyBee 11y ago
Ugh. I was going to link you to the doordash version of the logo, but they pulled it all from their site. The purpose of the logo is mainly to make the site not look weird. Since they use logos for everything else, having this huge blank space would look odd. So they shoved something there. As for the legality, under things like nominative fair use, doordash can only use as little of the trademark as necessary to identify to consumers. In this case, that is likely the words but not the symbol. So if they actually used the symbol, they would be in trouble. (In essence, in-n-out will argue this both ways. They will argue using a fake logo dilutes their brand, and that doordash can't use their logo if doordash tries)
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > I was going to link you to the doordash version of the logo, but they pulled it all from their site. The DoorDash version is in this article: http://www.tmz.com/2015/11/11/in-n-out-lawsuit/ http://www.tmz.com/2015/11/11/in-n-out-lawsuit/