Latest Editions

McDonald’s Vs. McCurry’s

Play

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Download MP3
For eight years, McDonald’s has been fighting a restaurant in Malaysia called — McCurry. The American fast food giant tried to copyright the “mc” prefix. But Malaysia’s Federal Court said: NOT so fast. It ruled that other restaurants could use the Mc prefix so long as they served different food than McDonald’s.

Read the Transcript
This text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

MARCO WERMAN: Here’s another bit of copyright news from our nonexistent Copyright Desk.  It concerns McDonald’s and its competition.  Remember that Eddie Murphy movie, “Coming to America?”  It featured a knock-off McDonald’s restaurant in New York City.  The imitator was called, “McDowells.”  The owner says, “See!  They’re McDonalds, I’m McDowells.  They’ve got the Golden Arches; mine is the “Golden Arcs.  They got the Big Mac; I’ve got the Big Mick,” and so on.  Well, for eight years, McDonalds has been fighting a “real life restaurant” in Malaysia called McCurry.  The American fast-food-giant tried to copyright the “Mc” prefix, but Malaysia’s federal court said, “Not so fast!”  It ruled, today, that other restaurants could use the “Mc,” so long as they serve different food from McDonalds.  McCurry serves Indian food in downtown Kuala Lumpur.  The name is an abbreviation for Malaysian Chicken Curry.  Here’s the owner, A.M.S.P. Suppiah.

A.M.S.P. SUPPIAH: We are very relieved that this eight-year-old legal saga is over.  It’s a big pressure off our backs.  So, it’s final now that we can use our name, McCurry.

WERMAN: McCurry’s logo, by the way, couldn’t possibly be confused with McDonald’s “Golden Arches.”  It’s a “smiling chicken, giving a double thumbs-up.”  What’s a chicken so “McHappy” about?


Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

Discussion

One comment for “McDonald’s Vs. McCurry’s”

  • Kristina M. Grasso

    Mr. Werman’s report was accurate in all respect but one. This is not a case of copyright infringement. Rather, this is a trademark matter. A trademark protects names, terms or symbols that are used to identify the products of a certain manufacturer or company. In contrast, A copyright protects original creative works such as books, movies, songs, paintings, photographs, websites and choreography.