Discuss the significance of this case in U.S. trademark law jurisprudence.
Instructions
Case Analysis
Burger King, the national franchise, is banned from opening a restaurant within 20 miles of Mattoon, Illinois. So, there is not a Burger King there; no problem, right? Not so fast! In the late 1950s, Gene and Betty Hoots trademarked the iconic name. Well, they trademarked it in Illinois at least. When the national company decided to open a chain close by, the Hoots sued and won their case. However, the national chain was able to keep the name Burger King, but the Hoots were also able to keep the name in accordance with the stipulation that the national chain could not open a store within a 20-mile radius of the original store in Mattoon, Illinois.
In a minimum of 500 words, explain the reasons why this decision was made, and discuss the significance of this case in U.S. trademark law jurisprudence.
For this assignment, please find one article from the Online Library(see attachment) that discusses intellectual property; elaborate on how the article relates to the Burger King case to support your answer. Identify the main issues with copyright and trademark in the article, and explain how these issues were either upheld or overturned.
Cite any direct quotes or paraphrased material from the article. Use APA format.
References
Chirico, F., Criaco, G., Baù, M., Naldi, L., Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Kotlar, J. (2020). To patent or not to patent: That is the question. Intellectual property protection in family firms. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 44(2), 339–367. https://doi-org.libraryresources.columbiasouthern….
References
Yoshioka-Kobayashi, T., Miyanoshita, T., & Kanama, D. (2020). Revisiting incremental product innovations in the food-manufacturing industry: an empirical study on the effect of intellectual property rights. Journal of Economic Structures, 9(1), 1–19. https://doi-org.libraryresources.columbiasouthern….
to_patent_or_not_to_patent revisiting_incremental_product_innovations
Answer preview to discuss the significance of this case in U.S. trademark law jurisprudence.
APA
610 words
