Would Subway win a suit against a place called Steakway?

[Disney1fan2002]

I think they should lose. I would HOPE they lose a court battle (Subway)


http://www.nhregister.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15461371&BRD=1281&PAG=461&dept_id=517515&rfi=6

 

[Papa Deuce]

I don't know but I say they would lose. As long as the other company doesn't try to appear as tho they are part of Subway.

There are lots of ""R"us companies out there.

 

[Lessa of Pern]

I think Subway has a real claim here. the names are just too close.

 

[Disney1fan2002]

I think Subway has a real claim here. the names are just too close.

So how much does a copyright cover? I mean, you can copyright your name, but then it means ANYTHING even close, even thought the two business' are not even in direct competition?

 

[Micca]

Seems to me that Subway borrowed their name from an underground transport system that is called...wait a minute...it's coming to me....Oh yeah.
SUBWAY. Also, having eaten at Subway, one image that doesn't come to mind is "Steak". BTW, I have a new restaurant opening soon that specializes in pork sandwiches. It's called "HAMWAY". Anybody see any problems with that?

 

[Lessa of Pern]

So how much does a copyright cover? I mean, you can copyright your name, but then it means ANYTHING even close, even thought the two business' are not even in direct competition?

we're not talking copyright, we're talking trademark. and the trademark law says that if it's likely to cause confusion among consumers...it's a sandwich shop. with a name very similar to a major chain of sandwich shops. and it's a name very likely chosen for just that reason.

 

[Disney1fan2002]

Seems to me that Subway borrowed their name from an underground transport system that is called...wait a minute...it's coming to me....Oh yeah.
SUBWAY. Also, having eaten at Subway, one image that doesn't come to mind is "Steak". BTW, I have a new restaurant opening soon that specializes in pork sandwiches. It's called "HAMWAY". Anybody see any problems with that?

LOL..how does someone in Conn. know what Subway sells? In Conn., subs are called GRINDERS. So, I guess I can open a sandwich shop in Conn. and call it Grinderway....or somewhere else and call it Hoagieway.

 

[Lessa of Pern]

Seems to me that Subway borrowed their name from an underground transport system that is called...wait a minute...it's coming to me....Oh yeah.
SUBWAY. Also, having eaten at Subway, one image that doesn't come to mind is "Steak". BTW, I have a new restaurant opening soon that specializes in pork sandwiches. It's called "HAMWAY". Anybody see any problems with that?

Subway sandwich shop vs. subway system...no possibility of confusion in the mind of the consumer.

and Hamway? sounds too much like "Amway" for my taste.

 

[Beth76]

Hmmm. That's making me change my tune about Subway. Sounds like they're just trying to beat up on the "little guy". I hope the steak guy wins. There's a chain of sub shops called "Sub Shop". I don't see the difference between the two names.

 

[Papa Deuce]

Here is another one. I don't know who will know about the company that makes "Monster Cable". These are the high quality video and audio cables that are used in home theaters and such.

Well, they are suing Monster.com..... saying that they feel that monster.com is infringing on their copyright. Now how dumb is that? One comapny makes audio and video cables, while the other is an internet job finder service.

 

[Geoff_M]

we're not talking copyright, we're talking trademark. and the trademark law says that if it's likely to cause confusion among consumers...it's a sandwich shop. with a name very similar to a major chain of sandwich shops. and it's a name very likely chosen for just that reason.

You're correct in what must be demonstrated for Subway to prevail, but I don't think Subway would be a shoe-in to win. I think Subway would be hard pressed to prove that there would be a significant percentage of patrons that would walk into Steakway thinking they were walking into a Subway. A "sandwich" is a pretty broad category of food items, the logos bear no similarities, etc.

I also don't think the "Mc" example in the news items applies in this case. Americans know that McDonald's likes to slap "Mc" on the front end of lots of diverse products: McFlurry, McMuffin, McRib, etc. Subway doesn't have a track record of slapping a "way" suffix on the ends of their product lines.

However, I don't blame Subway for doing what they think they need to do to protect their trademark... just like when the Beatle's Apple Records tried to sue upstart Apple Computer or Domino Sugar tried to nix Domino's Pizza.

The "Monster" lawsuit is going to fail too.

 

[bicker]

I'd love to see the logo -- that would help me determine whether there was intend to confuse the public. However, the article makes clear that if the public is generally confused, despite any intent, it's still a violation.

 

[JimB.]

Would Subway win? WHo knows. It may come down to who wants to make the issue go away quickest.

Do they have a point? IMHO, yes.

If "Steakway" was not trying to ride on Subway's "coattails", then why the similar name? I do not think the ______Way name was a mere coincidence. They (once again IMHO) may think that the SubWay name has some pretty good brand or name recoginition appeal & are trying to capitalize on THAT, rather than establishing their own corporate & brand indentity.

 

[bicker]

And JimB's message already demonstrates the confusion: He called the place Steakway instead of Steakways... so easy to slip down into confusing the two names.

 

[Lessa of Pern]

You're correct in what must be demonstrated for Subway to prevail, but I don't think Subway would be a shoe-in to win. I think Subway would be hard pressed to prove that there would be a significant percentage of patrons that would walk into Steakway thinking they were walking into a Subway. A "sandwich" is a pretty broad category of food items, the logos bear no similarities, etc.

I also don't think the "Mc" example in the news items applies in this case. Americans know that McDonald's likes to slap "Mc" on the front end of lots of diverse products: McFlurry, McMuffin, McRib, etc. Subway doesn't have a track record of slapping a "way" suffix on the ends of their product lines.

However, I don't blame Subway for doing what they think they need to do to protect their trademark... just like when the Beatle's Apple Records tried to sue upstart Apple Computer or Domino Sugar tried to nix Domino's Pizza.

The "Monster" lawsuit is going to fail too.

of course I'm right...I didn't go to law school for nix, you know.

I think Subway has a better claim than Apple or Domino, by the way. no one is going to mistake computer for a Beatles record, after all. but a snadwich shop...that's much more likely to pose a problem.

 

[JennyMominRI]

If SUbway can win for this coudn't Wal Mart..KMart, any other *mart * ending store claim the same?

 

[Micca]

I forgot to mention that my "Hamway" product will be exclusively available at "Ham-Mart". Izat a problem? I could always change it to "Sub-mart"

 

[bicker]

"Mart" has been used in the names of stores since time immemorial. Since its use is ubiquitous, there is no risk of confusion.

Note that if the issue was about the "Sub" part of "Subway" I don't think they'd have a leg to stand on. "Sub" is very common in the names of sandwich shops.

 

[Kimberle]

I'd love to see the logo -- that would help me determine whether there was intend to confuse the public. However, the article makes clear that if the public is generally confused, despite any intent, it's still a violation.

I've seen the logo. It looks nothing like Subways. It's a red rectangular box with the words "Steakway" in black (or was it white?) in a totally different font. *I* would not confuse the two stores at all. They look totally different.

Subway needs to loose this one. Just using the word "way" in both names does not mean copyright infridgement. Copyright infridgement means having your products/stores presented in such a way where the consumer might mistake one for another.