3 ms·
Well, I'll admit the story is very confusing. The EU decision another poster linked does mention Big Mac and it also cites many examples where they used it in c
by mimixco 8y ago
Well, I'll admit the story is very confusing. The EU decision another poster linked does mention Big Mac and it also cites many examples where they used it in commerce but it says those aren't sufficient. Seems pretty strange to me.
I don't think they have any chance of keeping Supermac, which they registered and didn't use, but I'll bet they fight to the teeth to keep Big Mac.
- detaro 8y agoThe decision reads to me as if McDonald's didn't think they'd actually need to properly establish the factors as required by the law, since who'd think they're not using Big Mac, and submitted only some badly connected pieces of evidence. And officals don't like arguments that amount to half-assing and relying on everyone knows where the law calls for concrete evidence, or even aren't allowed to consider facts not brought forward by the party.
- mzs 8y agoMaybe other press coverage has been confusing, but this Courthouse News Service article is very clear. CNS tends to be excellent in coverage about legal matters for non-lawyers.