Rogers & Tartaro On Main Street : New York and Connecticut Business Litigation Lawyer & Attorney : Rogers & Tartaro Law Firm : Commercial Litigation : Westchester County NY, Fairfield County CT

"Branding" is a hot buzzword these days.  Consultants try to teach organizations that are new at it  (like small law firms, such as ours, and small businesses in general) how to establish a "brand."  More experienced organizations understand the value of their established brands and will vigorously defend them with all the legal means available.  Two recent examples involve the State of Vermont and the Taco Bell fast food chain.

The State of Vermont recently directed its legal ire against hamburger giant McDonald’s for the use of the word “maple” in the name of their new breakfast offering, McDonald's Fruit and Maple Oatmeal.   According to Bloomberg news reports, Governor Peter Shumlin said the only actual maple ingredient in the product was extracted from the bark of a bush that is a distant relative of the maple tree.  The MacDonald's product allegedly did not comply with Vermont's maple laws, which are very specific in the way in which the word “maple” is allowed to be used:  Vermont is very protective of its " maple" brand. As  Kelly Loftus of the Vermont Agency of Agriculture said, "It is illegal to use the word 'maple' for a product unless the sweetener is 100 percent pure maple. Artificial maple flavoring should be clearly and conspicuously labeled on the principal panel with the term 'artificial flavor'."

McDonald’s reportedly has acquiesced.  Bloomberg reports  that as of February 1, Vermont customers (and only Vermont customers) can now request that maple syrup or sugar be added to the oatmeal.

Taco Bell has also had to defend a cherished brand.  This time, it's not the use of the brand that is at issue; rather, the issue involves the sullying of a valuable brand name.  An Alabama law firm has filed a class action lawsuit against Taco Bell.  The company is being sued for false advertising for referring to its "seasoned ground beef" in its products.   The law firm has alledged that only 35% of the product is beef; the rest is filler, including something called “anti-dusting agent.”  MSNBC states that the lawsuit does not seek monetary damages, only that Taco Bell stop claiming that what they are selling is beef.

A statement on the Taco Bell website responds: “Unfortunately, the lawyers in this case elected to sue first and ask questions later -- and got their ‘facts’ absolutely wrong. We plan to take legal action for the false statements being made about our food."  While they refer to defending their food, they are really defending their Taco Bell brand.

I find these "brand battles" to be interesting and compelling.  I also find the legal and business lessons of these larger, more experienced organizations (whether a state or business entity) to be highly relevant and timely for all of us.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In addition to its small-town charm and sense of community spirit, Ridgefield is fortunate to have an abundance of excellent restaurants. 

Many of these wonderful eateries will offer some of their finest fare at The 12th Annual Taste of Ridgefield.  Held at the Ridgefield Community Center on Sunday, Jan. 30, the event will feature offerings from 30 restaurants and businesses in town.

The “Taste” raises funds for the Rotary Club of Ridgefield, which uses the money to support dozens of local charities.  My partner Angelo Tartaro and I are proud to be members of this worthwhile organization, which provides many admirable services for the Town.

The first serving is noon to 2:30 p.m., $35 advance, $40 door; second serving is 4 to 6:30 p.m., $40 advance, $45 door.

Whether you're a true "foodie," or someone who just enjoys a pleasant meal out, The Taste offers something for everyone, including a fun (and delicious) opportunity to support the community.  Please contact our office if you are interested in attending.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I'd like to start the New Year off on a lighter note. Even for lawyers there is more to life than "The Law."

Bringing a dog into your home requires a true commitment of time, energy and patience. But, it's a true joy to dog lovers. And there’s something very special about the bond between a shelter pet and its owners.   

In addition to saving a life (many rescue or shelter animals are often scheduled to be euthanized), the pet you bring home often enriches yours. Our family dog has a special role for a disabled family member - - not quite a therapy dog, but close. It's fascinating to watch as genuine, lasting bonds are formed based on canine instincts and human patience.   

Bev and I have both had the pleasure – and challenges – of opening our homes more than once to rescued pets. My family and I recently added Maggie, a lab mix, to our family.

There’s been an interesting learning curve for all parties involved, with the rules and regulations for Maggie clearly laid out. There is a consensus ad idemof our unspoken contract; we assume Maggie knows she will have to accept the repercussions from any damages (for example, to the carpet or, in our case, to a remote laid carelessly on a table).      

Interested in learning more about pet rescue and adoption?  Visit petfinder.com

 Toby Rogers

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Do you remember that commercial that opens with a man saying, “I’m not a doctor, but I play one on TV”? It appears that now we could have that type of disclosure with online reviews.

The Federal Trade Commission recently passed regulations that state that advertisers “must disclose any material connection between a person endorsing a product and the company selling the product.” In other words, if you’re being paid to endorse or review something, you’ve got to make that clear from the outset.

This is a good general rule for those writing a blog, Facebook page or “tweeting” on behalf of a company. But it will be interesting to see how this can be enforced with online review sites such as Yelp, Chowhound and even iTunes. The New York Times reported that the FTC had settled charges with a California marketing company that had been alleged to engage in deceptive advertising by having its employees write and post positive reviews of clients’ games in the Apple iTunes Store, without disclosing that they were being paid to do so.

This can also work the other way, with negative reviews. With the loss of inhibition and sense of anonymity that people experience online, reviews may be vicious and can even be defamatory. Additionally, rival companies can post negative “anonymous” reviews about competitive businesses, a practice that’s unethical, but legal (at least superficially, but such reviews can also be defamatory ). Defamatory reviews or comments may not attract the attention of any governmental agencies but can involve significant liabilities through "self-enforcement" (civil lawsuits).

Employers and employees need to be aware of the disclosure rules and the potential costs to their reputation and the business' bottom line. Last year, the Times reports, the State of New York had reached a $300,000 settlement with Lifestyle Lift, a cosmetic surgery outfit, over faked reviews of its products on the Internet.

Whether you call it “astroturfing,” propaganda, or even if you think it's outright fraudulent, the practice falls into an ethical gray area and, in some cases, could ultimately be illegal.

p.s.   This Just In:  The Wall Street Journal Law Blog reports that a lawsuit involving singer Courtney Love will be tried in February and explores whether defamatory "tweets"  can give rise to liability. 

Stay tuned....

image courtesy reviewcrew.org

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks