Mc Curry wins in IPR case over multinational

In a major ruling in the history of intellectual property rights in Sri Lanka, a local sprat stumped off a multinational shark in the realm of brand wars.

Brands are valuable symbols that reflect an organisation’s image and benefits. They are so intensely (and at a big cost) ‘planted’ in the minds of the consumer; therefore any usage of these marks by another is likely to risk the long term success of a business.

Thus corporates argue that a look-a-like logo will cause consumer confusion or be even deceptive. So, some with muscle are more aggressive than others when it comes to pursuing trademark violations.

Very recently there was a lawsuit to protect the proprietary claim over the ‘Mc’ prefix in restaurant and food product use. A case was filed under the Intellectual Property Act No. 36 of 2003 by a multinational food chain in Sri Lanka, when a local company applied to register the name ‘Mc Curry’.

The defendant was Lanka Spice Limited (LSL) – essentially a local Company renowned for its array of quality spices, curry powder and condiments.  Its products, which have the ‘McCurrie’ logo, are widely available in groceries and supermarkets islandwide.

LSL has been in the local market since 1982 well before the multinational food chain entered the Sri Lanka market. In fact the word ‘Mc’ was coined by LSL at its inception because its factory was located in Makumbura and products were all condiments.

When the multinational filed the lawsuit, LSL did not kneel. It claimed that it produced and marketed products which formed the base of ordinary dishes/recipes in Sri Lankan households. LSL valiantly defended its right to use its flagship ‘McCurrie’ logo and did not see even an iota of resemblance to the fast food offered by the multinational.

LSL thus became the centre of yet another global-wide string of court room battles of the same multinational.

“It’s not easy to control the use of such a ubiquitous name. How many Mc’s are used as a prefix to many names in the English language and brands all over?” argued LSL.

“Besides our logo is black and their one is yellow. Even the lettering in ours is italic and looks fairy tale in design as against their basic fonts,” said one of the Directors of LSL. “Do you see any burgers, fries or desserts here?” asked the same Director, standing in front of its sales outlet at Maya Avenue in Colombo 6.

“Our corporate colours of black, white and red are today copied by many other spice brands. Yet we don’t complain because we know that our products are quality-wise far superior to those who try to emulate us,” he added.

The court ruled in the defendant’s favour that, the ‘Mc’ prefix had no merit and since LSL’s ‘McCurrie’ exclusively sells base raw spices in jars and sachets, the plaintiff multinational in the restaurant business did not suffer any loss of business from the smaller producer.

Feeling relieved, the Director said, “We will now take steps to register the brand ‘McCurry’ for a new range of curry bases (masalas) developed by SISIR (Singapore Institute of Scientific Research) into the Sri Lanka market.”

The company’s lawyers said: “It opens the way for LSL and other Sri Lankans to use the ‘Mc’ prefix without fear.”

An intellectual property analyst offered a different perspective: “In times of economic downturn, people become more aggressive in safeguarding their IP and thus become more litigious. That explains a lot. Is the restaurant chain losing market share worldwide and therefore desperate?”

A multi-national giant can afford unlimited legal costs more than a third world country producer. LSL wouldn’t disclose how much it spent on the case.