4 ms·
If I had to guess, this is a trademark issue. First sale doctrine only gives him the right to sell legitimately-marked products, but not to use the Krispy Krem
by kd5bjo 7y ago
If I had to guess, this is a trademark issue. First sale doctrine only gives him the right to sell legitimately-marked products, but not to use the Krispy Kreme marks in advertising. His FB page was called “Krispy Kreme Run Minnesota”, which implies an endorsement that doesn’t exist.
- jnwatson 7y agoAnybody that has an ounce of sense understands this is not endorsed by the brand.
- lotsofpulp 7y agoThat argument may not hold up in a court if Krispy Kreme had to explain why it didn't do anything to prevent known misuse of its trademark.
- SllX 7y agoThis is the most sensible possibility I’ve seen. This whole time I was scrolling I was wondering how this is different from the stupid crap Postmates and DoorDash do, or how it squares with the First Sale Doctrine.
- jjeaff 7y agoIf that's the case, seems like a friendly request to change the name of the facebook group would make more sense.