From the Associated Press

[deckardcanine]

Not Lovin' It: American fast-food giant McDonald's lost an eight-year trademark battle to prevent Malaysian restaurant McCurry from using the "Mc" prefix, in a precedent-setting judgment by Malaysia's highest court. The Federal Court ruled Tuesday that Oak Brook, Ill.-based McDonald's cannot appeal against another court's verdict that had allowed McCurry to use "Mc" in its name. The owner says McCurry, which serves Indian food, is an abbreviation for Malaysian Chicken Curry.

Put that in your McPipe and smoke it!

Comments

[level-head.livejournal.com]

The demurrer was unsuccessful; the Court felt that they had a colorable case. This battle went on for most of a decade.

It seems to me that almost any prefixing of "Mc" in front of a noun that wouldn't normally be subject to it -- such as McCurry -- would make a person think of McDonalds.

An example: McJob. It's intended to make one think of that company in particular, and not Scottish ancestries.

Trying to sue for use of the full name McDonald would be nearly guaranteed to fail, and I am surprised that they allegedly tried.

But the use of a "Mc-" prefix by a restaurant in a country in which McDonald's is well known? I think they had at least an arguable position. If "MCCurry" had been written that way, and the style was in use before the arrival of McDonald's, that would be a perfectly valid defense.

But McCurry, done later? Not so much, I think.

===|==============/ Level Head