How Drunk Would You Need To Be To Confuse Jack Daniel's With Cayman Jack? Stick to it! More chocolate shapes for the Court of Justice. Chocolate bunnies are already on the menu of Europe's highest court -- and now the Luxembourg judges can look forward to another tasty treat in store, this time involving chocolate twigs. It's Case C-2/12 Trianon Productie BV v Revillon Chocolatier SAS, a reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (the Dutch Supreme Court). While the application was lodged with the CJEU on 3 January of this year, details of the reference are not yet available on the Curia site.
Fortunately this weblog has received this very helpful explanatory note, prepared and translated into English by the Kat's friend Stephen Vousden. "The parties make chocolate-sticks. In 1998 the defendant French company, Revillon, began making theirs in the form of 'un sarment de vigne' – a long-wiggly, tiny-bobbled, vine-shoot. The chocolate-sticks came in different flavours and were sold by the box. TENDANCE • Les gastronomes amateurs énervent les chefs. Lors de leur repas dans un restaurant étoilé, les amateurs sont nombreux à photographier les mets pour mettre ensuite les clichés en ligne. Une pratique qui dérange les chefs, car elle porterait atteinte au droit à l'image de leurs plats. Reportage en Suisse. "Regardez, là, vous voyez cette crevette ? Elle est vivante! Quand on a ôté le couvercle du plat, elle a bondi sur la table ! " raconte Josef Billes, 57 ans, propriétaire de la confiserie Monnier à Morat et à Berne, smartphone à la main.
Une délicatesse que David Tarnowski, étoile montante de la gastronomie romande, 16/20 au GaultMillau Suisse, apprécierait de rencontrer plus souvent. Là où Josef Billes voit une source d'inspiration, le chef de Chardonne [canton de Vaud] craint plutôt la copie. Critique culinaire improvisé Plat protégé La tendance paraît cependant difficile à contrecarrer. Ce sont pourtant bien les images qui ont valu son succès au site Foodreporter.fr. Un lapin restera toujours un lapin. Sweet success for Lindt in chocolate Easter bunny case. 4 April 2011Last updated at 16:12 Lindt says other firms must not confuse shoppers with similar rabbits The Swiss chocolate firm Lindt and Spruengli has won a marathon court battle to protect its golden Easter bunnies from an Austrian rival. A Vienna court has told the Hauswirth company to stop making its own chocolate rabbits wrapped in gold foil.
The legal battle dates back to 2004. The Lindt bunny, sporting a red ribbon and bell, first appeared in 1952 and was given EU trademark status in 2000. The Vienna court said Hauswirth's bunny could be confused with Lindt's. A Lindt manager, Adalbert Lechner, said the judgement had confirmed his company's view that "Hauswirth harmed our trademark". "We hope the legal proceedings are finally closed with this judgement," he said. Hauswirth had argued that Lindt was using its trademark clout to crush competitors. Les boîtes de conserve SPAM font un procès au logiciel Spam Arrest. Hormel Foods, un groupe américain de produits alimentaires, intente une action juridique contre la société Spam Arrest, qui édite des logiciels de protection contre les courriers électroniques non sollicités, surnommés "spam" en jargon de l'internet.
Hormel conteste l'utilisation du mot spam car elle possède une marque du même nom ("SPAM (R)"), désignant du jambon en conserve et ressemblant à du corned-beef, créée dans les années 30 aux États-Unis. Au centre de ce conflit, une marque déposée par la société Spam Arrest début 2002, pour des «logiciels informatiques, spécifiquement conçus pour éliminer les courriers électroniques commerciaux non sollicités». Mais le fabricant de conserves conteste cette marque déposée, ainsi qu'une autre de même type. C'est Brian Cartmell, président et directeur exécutif de Spam Arrest, qui a décidé de rendre publique cette plainte pour contre-attaquer. Spam, un mot d'argot déjà parodié par les Monty Python en 1970. Who Owns the Korean Taco? - NYTimes.com. Kal Raustiala, a professor at UCLA Law School and the UCLA International Institute; and?
Chris Sprigman, a professor at the University of Virginia Law School, are? Experts in? Counterfeiting and intellectual property. They have been? Guest-blogging for us about copyright issues. Today, they write about copyright in the food industry. Who Owns the Korean Taco? Walking home one night in Los Angeles with his sister-in law, Mark Manguera, who worked in food services at a hotel at the time, had an epiphany. In L.A., food trucks are a common sight, but for decades they were dominated by basic Mexican fare aimed at construction workers and residents of poorer neighborhoods. In the beginning, even though the Kogi truck was parked in a busy part of West Hollywood, the team couldn’t give tacos away.
The rest is food history. The birth of the Korean taco raises a big question about creativity in cuisine. From a copyright perspective, cuisine is a lot like fashion. Lawsuit Over Turkey Cooking Instructions. Bartenders looking to copyright that drink you just ordered. This is nuts but Mike Masnick at Techdirt has the lowdown on a whole new level of stupid when it comes to this copyright madness. It seems that bartenders are being encouraged to try and copyright their drink recipes. Of course it helps that lawyers specializing in restaurant law are the ones that have raised the idea of drink recipe copyrights. First of all, no, the publication of a recipe cannot be protected. Straight from the US Copyright Office: “Mere listings of ingredients as in recipes, formulas, compounds, or prescriptions are not subject to copyright protection.”
That said, if there is “substantial literary expression” in, say, the description of how to prepare the recipethat part (and that part alone) could be covered by copyright, but that should have little impact on bartenders making similar mixed drinks This stemmed out of a post over at The Atlantic by Chantal Martineau who wrote Everyone wants a piece of the big spirits industry pie.