5 ms·

I think a closer analogy is a shop hanging a poster out front saying "Buy Samsung TV's here!" When you ask the shop keeper about the sign, they take you to the

I think a closer analogy is a shop hanging a poster out front saying "Buy Samsung TV's here!" When you ask the shop keeper about the sign, they take you to the TV section where there is a huge philipps tv display says that the TVs are in here. DoorDash isn't telling you that Applebees is Saddleback BBQ, they are just not making it as easy as they could to help you find what you are looking for.

Judgmentality 6y ago
Strongly disagree. Clicking on the link for Saddleback BBQ is effectively saying "take me to their ordering page" and I don't see how you could reasonably expect otherwise. Fraud is hard to prove because you have to prove intent, but this at best incompetence, almost assuredly false advertising, and pretty clearly fraud although good luck proving it in court.
- pbhjpbhj 6y ago
  FWIW the measure of trademark infringement is balance of probability, as it's civil law. So that would probably be the best way to combat it. Damages are probably less.
- jklein11 6y ago
  Looking at the ad[1] that Saddleback put in their article, I can't possibly see what would warrant incompetence, let alone false advertising or fraud. How is this any different than a newspaper ad saying "You can get Coke at Krogers" and then Krogers having a Pepsi display in the soda aisle. 1. https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/6KsGyAeFFfeliOLsLJzPQf5o1oMHv15IMMvcE08q7-mg-m1UvEaO0pSNB54FQzr1gG81H9vYiUqIMnRVAEZNnfErgGGgcdvTSFPjyVUKe9WPUvBMpCEbvwvjT8c4pFbwcRgB3MI3 https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/6KsGyAeFFfeliOLsLJzPQf5o1o...
  - Judgmentality 6y ago
    Because clicking on a link is different from reading a poster. I think we just have to agree to disagree.
    - jklein11 6y ago
      I'm sorry I'm not trying to be obtuse here. I would genuinely like to understand your point of view. I'm not sure if you were the one who downvoted me here but it hardly seems fair to downvote someone for having a different point of view.

Judgmentality 6y ago

Strongly disagree. Clicking on the link for Saddleback BBQ is effectively saying "take me to their ordering page" and I don't see how you could reasonably expect otherwise. Fraud is hard to prove because you have to prove intent, but this at best incompetence, almost assuredly false advertising, and pretty clearly fraud although good luck proving it in court.

pbhjpbhj 6y ago
FWIW the measure of trademark infringement is balance of probability, as it's civil law. So that would probably be the best way to combat it. Damages are probably less.
jklein11 6y ago
Looking at the ad[1] that Saddleback put in their article, I can't possibly see what would warrant incompetence, let alone false advertising or fraud. How is this any different than a newspaper ad saying "You can get Coke at Krogers" and then Krogers having a Pepsi display in the soda aisle. 1. https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/6KsGyAeFFfeliOLsLJzPQf5o1oMHv15IMMvcE08q7-mg-m1UvEaO0pSNB54FQzr1gG81H9vYiUqIMnRVAEZNnfErgGGgcdvTSFPjyVUKe9WPUvBMpCEbvwvjT8c4pFbwcRgB3MI3 https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/6KsGyAeFFfeliOLsLJzPQf5o1o...
- Judgmentality 6y ago
  Because clicking on a link is different from reading a poster. I think we just have to agree to disagree.
  - jklein11 6y ago
    I'm sorry I'm not trying to be obtuse here. I would genuinely like to understand your point of view. I'm not sure if you were the one who downvoted me here but it hardly seems fair to downvote someone for having a different point of view.