An Australian biscuit maker has launched a legal challenge to a new doughnut by US manufacturer Krispy Kreme, claiming that the confectionery infringes its trade mark rights. Australia's Arnott's has been making the Vo-Vo biscuit for over a hundred years and registered the name as a trade mark in 1906. One variant is the Iced Vo …
You only wrote this story for that headline.
Did the Judoon
Write the headline from a workstation on the moon?
Dough-vo, Doh! No!
Ho ho ho
Nice headline. Yo.
Do the customers really know or care who exactly makes their favourite sweet treats ?
Up until the dawn of the MP3 player everyone was still referring to the personal cassette player as a walkman, people still refer to vacuum cleaners as hoovers. I don't think the consumer really cares who makes the generic item that they have bought so long as it does what they want it to and everyone knows what generic product they are referring to when they use its generic name.
If people start buying more doughnuts than biscuits it'll be because they prefer the the doughnuts to the biscuits and not because they're confused about who makes them.
....netbook anyone ?
Whomever came up with "No-go woe for doughnut co after Vo-Vo blow" kindly promote them to Prime Minister.
Is the Iced Vo-Vo itself a knock-off?
(top item, for those of a slow disposition)
I only read this for the headline...
"Posted in Small Biz"
Ah, not "Bootnotes" then? so:
Where's the IT angle?
Best. Headline. Ever.
Well done guys!
I see the IT angle....
Donuts - the food of IT champions. And thanks a lot - this article has insidiously made me crave donuts right now.
That is all.
So, they're trying to put a
woah woah on the vo vo?
Best Head/Sub Ever
Have sudden hankering for spongy biscuit with fondant coconut topping, but of course I'm bound tae! Geddit?! .... Bounty! Ha ha oh I am a one.
Since Arnott's doesn't sell in the US...
...then they need to STFU, as it's not unfair competition. I'd much prefer to have the real thing myself, but since I can't, I don't want them to be able to stop me from having a knockoff.
The Krispy Kreme knockoff is probably better anyway, since they make some damn good doughnuts.
Arnott's like a good court battle:
That's the most unintelligible headline I've ever seen in The Reg. And that's saying something.
KK Australia, not USA
Krispy Kreme Australia run the dough-vo show.
Arnotts see it as a low blow
So they take them to court
To see they get nought
For inferior coconutted dough
Thank you, I'm here all week, try the veal
@AC: Since Arnott's doesn't sell in the US...
"...then they need to STFU, as it's not unfair competition."
1) It's not about unfair competition, it's about trademark infringement. Did you read the article?
2) ... But Krispy Kreme sells in Oz. Did you read the article?
Oh, it's not in the US, so it doesn't matter. Right.
Thsi case refers to krispy kreme sales in Australia, not the US.
"Trade mark law specialist Jude Tonner of Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind OUT-LAW.COM, said that if the case happened in the UK then the fact that one product was a 'tribute' to another would make no difference."
I realise there are lots of similarities between English law and Australian law, but discussing the case as if it were taking place in the UK just doesn't make sense.
"Since Arnott's doesn't sell in the US......then they need to STFU"
RTFA, mungbean - "Arnott's has written to Krispy Kreme's Australian arm, demanding that it withdraw the doughnut, but Krispy Kreme Australia chief executive John McGuigan said it will not back down." Krispy Kreme operates in Australia.