Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
restaurants meet lawyers: this is what it has come to?!?
#1
perhaps some of you saw this in the NYT today. really disgusted me to read this. i'm not one of those "lawyers are evil" wankers but this is really over the top. but, i guess it's up there with trademarking initials and common words. we've stepped over the edge and there's no turning back..

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/27/nyregi....html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print
June 27, 2007
Chef Sues Over Intellectual Property (the Menu)

By PETE WELLS
Sometimes, Rebecca Charles wishes she were a little less influential.

She was, she asserts, the first chef in New York who took lobster rolls, fried clams and other sturdy utility players of New England seafood cookery and lifted them to all-star status on her menu. Since opening Pearl Oyster Bar in the West Village 10 years ago, she has ruefully watched the arrival of a string of restaurants she considers “knockoffs” of her own.

Yesterday she filed suit in Federal District Court in Manhattan against the latest and, she said, the most brazen of her imitators: Ed McFarland, chef and co-owner of Ed’s Lobster Bar in SoHo and her sous-chef at Pearl for six years.

The suit, which seeks unspecified financial damages from Mr. McFarland and the restaurant itself, charges that Ed’s Lobster Bar copies “each and every element” of Pearl Oyster Bar, including the white marble bar, the gray paint on the wainscoting, the chairs and bar stools with their wheat-straw backs, the packets of oyster crackers placed at each table setting and the dressing on the Caesar salad.

Mr. McFarland would not comment on the complaint, saying that he had not seen it yet. But he said that Ed’s Lobster Bar, which opened in March, was no imitator.

“I would say it’s a similar restaurant,” he said, “I would not say it’s a copy.”

Lawyers for Ms. Charles, 53, said that what Ed’s Lobster Bar had done amounted to theft of her intellectual property — the kind of claim more often seen in publishing and entertainment, or among giant restaurant chains protecting their brand.

In recent years, a handful of chefs and restaurateurs have invoked intellectual property concepts, including trademarks, patents and trade dress — the distinctive look and feel of a business — to defend their restaurants, their techniques and even their recipes, but most have stopped short of a courtroom. The Pearl Oyster Bar suit may be the most aggressive use of those concepts by the owner of a small restaurant. Some legal experts believe the number of cases will grow as chefs begin to think more like chief executives.

Charles Valauskas, a lawyer in Chicago who represents a number of restaurants and chefs in intellectual property matters, called their discovery of intellectual property law “long overdue” and attributed it to greater competition as well as the high cost of opening a restaurant.

“Now the stakes are so high,” he said. “The average restaurant can be millions of dollars. If I were an investor I’d want to do something to make sure my investment is protected.”

Ms. Charles’s investment was modest. She built Pearl Oyster Bar for about $120,000 — a cost that in today’s market qualifies as an early-bird special.

She acknowledged that Pearl was itself inspired by another narrow, unassuming place, Swan Oyster Depot in San Francisco. But she said she had spent many months making hundreds of small decisions about her restaurant’s look, feel and menu.

Those decisions made the place her own, she said, and were colored by her history. The paint scheme, for instance, was meant to evoke the seascape along the Maine coast where she spent summers as a girl.

“My restaurant is a personal reflection of me, my experience, my family,” she said. “That restaurant is me.”

Mr. McFarland, she said, had unfairly profited from all the thought she had put into building Pearl. “To have that handed to you, so you don’t have to make those decisions — it’s unfair,” she said.

But the detail that seems to gnaw at her most is a $7 appetizer on Mr. McFarland’s menu: “Ed’s Caesar.”

She has never eaten it, but she and her lawyers claim it is made from her own Caesar salad recipe, which calls for a coddled egg and English muffin croutons.

She learned it from her mother, who extracted it decades ago from the chef at a long-gone Los Angeles restaurant. It became a kind of signature at Pearl. And although she taught Mr. McFarland how to make it, she said she had guarded the recipe more closely than some restaurateurs watch their wine cellars.

“When I taught him, I said, ‘You will never make this anywhere else,’ ” she insisted. According to lawyers for Ms. Charles, the Caesar salad recipe is a trade secret and Mr. McFarland had no more business taking it with him after he left than a Coca-Cola employee entrusted with the formula for Diet Coke.

Mr. McFarland called the allegation that he was a Caesar salad thief “a pretty ridiculous claim.”

“I have my own recipes for my items,” he said.

Asked to elaborate on the differences between his restaurant and Pearl, Mr. McFarland said: “I’d say it’s a lot more upscale than Pearl. A lot neater, a lot cleaner and a lot nicer looking.” Ed’s Lobster Bar incorporates novel features like a raw bar and a skylight, he said; as for the white marble bar, he said one could be seen in “every raw bar” in Boston, where he had done “additional homework in designing the dining room.”

Calling the lawsuit “a complete shock to me,” Mr. McFarland went on to say: “I just find it interesting that she’d want to draw attention to the fact that she’s bringing a lawsuit against me that’s just going to bring more business my way. I personally have nothing to be concerned about, in my opinion.”

Other chefs, however, are taking intellectual property rights seriously.

One of Mr. Valauskas’s clients, Homaro Cantu, has applied for patents on a number of his culinary inventions, like a method for printing pictures of food on flavored, edible paper. Mr. Cantu also makes his cooks sign a nondisclosure agreement before they so much as boil water at Moto, his restaurant in Chicago.

Tim Wu, a professor at Columbia Law School, said that this almost seemed an inevitable result of bringing lawyers into the kitchen. “The first thing a lawyer would say is have all your people sign nondisclosure agreements,” he said. “It’s a classic American marriage between food and law.”

Few chefs have followed Mr. Cantu’s footsteps all the way to the Patent and Trademark Office. One who did is David Burke, the chef at David Burke & Donatella, on the Upper East Side and other restaurants. He said he had trademarked a “swordfish chop” and “salmon pastrami” but no longer tried to defend those terms from copycats.

“You’ve got to chase people down if they use it. I got tired of it,” he said. But he said he still applied for trademarks on more recent innovations, like his bacon-flavored spray.

Many chefs are skeptical that intellectual property law conforms to their line of work. Tom Colicchio said that he had decided not to do anything about a sandwich shop that he considers a clone of his sandwich chain, ’Wichcraft. “There’s nothing you can do,” he said. “You can’t protect recipes, you can’t protect what a place looks like, it’s impossible.”

But Ms. Charles is willing to spend some time and money to prove her point. (She once sued the partner she opened Pearl with, Mary Redding, in an ownership dispute. Ms. Redding went on to open her own West Village seafood restaurant, Mary’s Fish Camp.)

Ms. Charles has come to think that if this case forces Ed’s Lobster Bar to change until it no longer resembles Pearl Oyster Bar, it could be the most influential thing she has ever done.

“I thought if I could have success with this lawsuit, that could be an important contribution,” she said. “If some guy in California is having problems, he could go to his lawyer and look at this case and say, ‘Maybe we can do something about it.’ ”


Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
Reply
#2
Good heavens, better not tell the owner about all the little seafood shacks in New England!
Reply
#3
It used to be that competition was good and the best business would win on its own merits (quality, service,etc.).

Now we have someone that wants to trademark the use of white marble? She wants to deny him to be able to call a salad "Ed's Caesar"?

Hell, we might as well sell people into lifelong slavery if we deny them the ability to earn a living in their field after they leave another company.

It's a case of sour grapes and insecurity.
Reply
#4
I couldn't disagree with the previous posters more. It's the same thing as if someone copied the look of a website, after the original designer put 100's of hours into the design. It's wrong, and it's illegal--if a judge/jury so determines.

Even the other guy says, "I'd say it's similar." He used to work for her!

Or should all downloads be free? No copyright?
Reply
#5
I can see some merit in the suit if the other chef actually *stole* her family recipes, but how would she know? She says she never even tasted their food. Her claim that the look and feel of her seafood restaurant is intellectual property is hard to swallow - all eateries draw on history and local color; hers seems interchangeable with dozens of other upscale seafood restaurants. She even admits that she took some ideas from a place in San Francisco!
Reply
#6
>>It's the same thing as if someone copied the look of a website

In the words of Pablo Picasso -

Bad artists copy. Good artists steal.

Copyright laws have gotten out of hand in this country. They do not exist to funnel money into an existing industry. They exist to ENCOURAGE innovation. Perhaps she should come up with a new idea once every 10 years.
Reply
#7
> The suit, which seeks unspecified financial damages from Mr. McFarland
> and the restaurant itself, charges that Ed’s Lobster Bar copies “each and
> every element” of Pearl Oyster Bar, including the white marble bar, the gray
> paint on the wainscoting, the chairs and bar stools with their wheat-straw
> backs, the packets of oyster crackers placed at each table setting and the
> dressing on the Caesar salad.

From the description, they're not copying the menu. They're copying the trade-dress.

If so, that's possibly a legit lawsuit.

Think of it like this: You're Dunkin Donuts and somebody opens a donut place across the street from you, copying your little donut shack exactly, except for the name, which still looks suspiciously like your own logo.

Now the place across the street makes really REALLY bad donuts. But because it looks just like your donut shack, YOU loose customers.

Where do you turn for help?

Trade dress is essentially the same as a trademark. It identifies a the origin of goods, allowing customers to make educated decisions about the quality of the products that they are buying. If someone rips off your trade dress, there's the possibility that people will confuse your products with those of your competitor and end up with defective goods that they blame on YOU.

The law protects both consumers and merchants from this situation, but there's a catch or two... the big one is that the plaintiff is going to have to show that her trade dress distinctively identifies her products and services. If those decorations and that oh-so-special salad dressing don't point straight back to her restaurant, she loses her case and the wad of legal fees she spent trying to oppress her competitors.

I'd like to see this tried in court.

As a judge, I'd throw out the "trade secret" lawsuit, tho. She never made her chefs sign NDA's. Oops!
Reply
#8
[quote MacMagus]>

Now the place across the street makes really REALLY bad donuts. But because it looks just like your donut shack, YOU loose customers.
Nahhh, you'll just lose them. They're only loose customers if they have loose morals. Or if they have a couple of screws loose. Otherwise one "o" will suffice.
Reply
#9
> Nahhh, you'll just lose them.


Eye Halve a Spelling Chequer

Eye halve a spelling chequer
It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.

Eye strike a quay and type a word
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait a weigh.

As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite
Its all most never ron.

Eye have run this poem threw it
I am shore your pleased two no
Its letter perfect in it's weigh
My chequer tolled me sew.
Reply
#10
Check out #1

http://www.bspcn.com/2007/05/16/10-gramm...ok-stupid/
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)