McDonald's Loses the 'Big Mac' Brand

 

‘Big Mac’ McDonald's Signature Burger

  The 'Big Mac' burger, which is like a symbol of McDonald's, was created in 1967 by Michael James Delligatti, who was operating a branch in Pennsylvania. Developed to target consumers who prefer a full meal, the Big Mac has been popular since its release due to its larger size than other products. The Big Mac, sold at McDonald's stores around the world, has become a world-famous global menu, with prices determined by country, and there are even economists who use the so-called 'Big Mac Index' to measure the real value of each country's currency.

pixabay.com
McDonald's store

Filed, ‘Super Mac’, Irish fast food

  Super Mac, an Irish fast food brand founded by Pat McDonald in 1978, applied for the 'Super Mac' trademark to the EU in 2015 to expand its business in Europe. McDonald's filed an objection, saying that the trademark ‘Super Mac’ was similar to the Big Mac and it could cause confusion among consumers. In 2017, Super Mac requested the European Intellectual Property Office (hereinafter referred to as the EUIPO) to cancel McDonald's exclusive Big Mac trademark. As a result, the EUIPO approved a partial registration stating that the trademark Super Mac could only be used as a restaurant name, but stated that the trademark for the burger menu containing beef and chicken was still valid. However, McDonald's could not accept even this and appealed to the court.

intomark.com
Super Mac trademark

Long-term lawsuit

  On June 5, the European General Court (hereinafter the EGC) ruled in favor of Super Mac on the appeal filed by McDonald's in 2019. The EGC ruled in favor of Super Mac, stating that McDonald's ‘Big Mac’ is only recognized for menus containing beef. The EGC cited that McDonald had not used the term "Big Mac" for menu containing chicken for the past five years, and was using the other menu name, "McChicken," as the reason for the ruling.

 With this ruling, it will now be possible to use the name ‘Big Mac’ for burger menus that do not contain beef. After the ruling, McDonald's stated that the EGC's decision would not affect its use of the Big Mac trademark, and that the iconic menu, the Big Mac, would continue to be loved by customers, but the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) evaluated it as an important ruling that approached trademark use with common sense. With this ruling, it will now be possible to use the name Big Mac for burgers that do not contain beef in Europe.

freepik.com
Big Mac

McDonald's also lost a trademark lawsuit in Australia

  In 2020, McDonald's also had a trademark dispute related to the Big Mac with Burger King's Australian brand, "Hungry Jacks." Hungry Jack's launched burger menus called 'Big Jack' and 'Mega Jack'. These burgers are similar to the Big Mac not only in name but also in ingredients and appearance, so McDonald's filed a trademark lawsuit against Hungry Jack's. In response, Hungry Jack’s advertised that Australians would not confuse McDonald's Big Mac with its Big Jack, and that the Big Jack contains about 25% more Australian beef, making it different from the Big Mac. In November last year, the High Court of Australia dismissed McDonald's claim that the Big Jack infringed on the Big Mac's trademark. It also ruled that Hungry Jack's deceived consumers by advertising that it contained 25% more beef than the Big Mac, after verification results showed that this was not true.

seeklogo.com
Hungry Jack's

 In the ruling, the court ruled in favor of Hungry Jacks, stating that it is difficult to recognize the similarity that makes it difficult to distinguish between the two products, and that McDonald's failed to prove that Hungry Jacks' trademark infringes McDonald's Big Mac trademark.

 In this way, trademark disputes over McDonald's Big Mac are taking place in many places around the world. The trademark issues seem to be increasing as it has maintained its position as a popular menu representing McDonald's for a long time. Looking at the results of recent disputes, it seems that the rulings are not always favorable to McDonald's. I wonder how McDonald's will respond to these disputes in the future.