Sexy Sandwiches: PornHub Goes After Kebab Shop Over Signs, Logos
from the meat-stick dept
One of the common tests for whether something is trademark infringement is whether or not the public will be confused as to association between the infringer and another trademark owner. This typically comes down to several factors, such as the similarity within the uses and, importantly, whether the two entities compete in the same marketplace.
It’s hard to imagine two marketplaces being further apart from one another than pornography and German sandwiches. Weird sentence, right? Well, MindGeek, the company that owns Pornhub among other sites, has sent cease and desist notices to a kebab shop in New York City over its branding.
As reported by Chelsea News, a kebab shop named Doner Haus recently found itself squarely in the sights of the Pornhub owner, not because of its name, but because of the font, style, and design of choice it used on display. Frequent visitors of the porn site – relax, there’s no judgement here. We know many of you continue to patronise the site – will know that the site’s trademark branding and its black, white, and yellow contrast that greets viewers on the landing page. In paying the full homage, the shop also has sexually suggestive statements plastered all over its windows, such as “Big Doner Energy” and “Bite Me, Lick Me, Eat Me Good”.
So, does the branding and signage actually call to mind the branding for Pornhub? Yes, absolutely.
MindGeek’s C&D indicates that the company will pursue legal action unless Doner Haus changes its branding, specifically suggesting that the public will be confused into thinking that Pornhub was somehow associated with the sandwich shop if it doesn’t.
And that’s the crux of the issue here: will they? Because of the branding, and some off-color suggestive signs on the storefront, could someone somehow think that Pornhub had expanded its business beyond adult videos into… German style foodstuffs? That seems like quite a leap and I frankly don’t believe it. Neither does Doner Haus’ attorneys.
Doner Haus and its attorney have more or less rubbished the Pornhub owner’s claims of alleged association, saying that there is no evidence that would suggest people would believe it was sponsored by the internet company. “Our client respects the trademark rights of others, and expects others to respect their rights to rightfully use trademarks, including trade dress, that do not infringe the rights of others,” the shop’s attorney wrote inresponse. “That being said, Döner Haus not only disagrees with your assessment of the alleged trade dress infringement of your client’s Pornhub trade dress, but considers the same to be so incredible as to be beyond the pale.”
And so now we wait to see if MindGeek is bluffing or really is going to pursue legal action against the restaurant. MindGeek certainly has the war chest to finance such a legal battle, of course.
But it would be hard for me to see them actually winning this battle in court. Sandwiches can be sexy, sure, but they aren’t sex.
Filed Under: likelihood of confusion, logos, trademark
Companies: doner haus, mindgeek, pornhub
Comments on “Sexy Sandwiches: PornHub Goes After Kebab Shop Over Signs, Logos”
Well,Mindgeek certainly lived long enough to be the villain…
Re:
And just like with Harvey Dent, all it took was a flip of a coin.
Mueslix
I’m sure Peter Griffin can: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMHKwQEe4IQ
Anyway, is this something that would fall under parody?
Doner Haus telling Porn Hub to get fucked.
I doubt that MindGeek has a case. I mean, it’s not like the restaurant was named Boner Haus, HEYOOOOO!
Step sister wants your sausage…
Eat my roast beef sandwich…
Hot brats double teamed in the buns…
I’ll see myself out
Re:
You forgot, “Our meat in your mouth”.
Re:
Ok I’m back
Come eat us out…
Just give me the sausage…
For those who like it long and thick…
Re: Re:
Real bangers!
MindGeek has a simple solution
People confused that Pornhub is somehow associated with Doner Haus?
Establish a geoblock around the establishment for all MindGeek sites! Problem solved!
I’ve not looked at the actual registration applications for either business, but I would bet even money that Döner Haus did not say anything about “using a web server to provide sexual entertainment”, and that MindGeek did not say anything about “food” or “food services”. At that point, they are squarely in two different markets where the proverbial average-man-in-the-street would not be confused as to who does what.
This C&D really deserved the Cleveland Browns response: “…. some asshole is signing your name to stupid letters.”
Re:
Great point. If trademark law worked the way it’s supposed to, they should be able to call their restaurant PornHub and it wouldn’t be a violation.
Re: Re:
Yeah, technically that would be true. That is, until someone says “Hey, looky there, Pornhub is now serving porn right out here on the street!” Different markets or not, the Pornhub name itself is an identitifier that’s very widely known, even to a good-sized number of persons who don’t consume port. A shop trying that one would quite likely lose on the merits, even if it was complying with the law (as in, how the trademark application was filled out). IOW, most any court would likely rule that the trademark application was misleading, and should not be/have been granted.
Re: Re: Re:
… who don’t consume porn
Though they may consume wine of some particular taste, who know.
Maybe MindGeek is looking for a free lunch?
Re:
Maybe Doner Haus shouldn’t have used Mind Geeks branding…..?
You lot certainly are predictable in your responses!
Re: Re:
We lot certainly know how to detect differences that are obvious to a blind person. What’s your excuse?
Re: Re:
Maybe Mindgeek, the porn monopolist, should be using something more distinctive than colors, a rounded shape and a font for branding?
I mean, all the pornbucks could have been put to better use, and Mindgeek has an infinite amount of it…
Re: Re:
Since when did branding mean a font and/or a choice of colors. If you cannot distinguish between ‘Doner Haus’ and ‘Porn Hub’ by looking at the signs, how did you manage to write you comment?
Re: Re:
Maybe if Trademark laws worked they they should.
Lame excuses and repeat stories make for predictable retort.
Re: Re: Re:
Hey, you really wanna know why the ‘repeat’ business? I’ll tell ya…..
The news cycles of various outlets are all backed by an agenda. Whether that agenda is promulgated by the media’s owner, or manager, or just some hack, you can take it to the bank that there’s an agenda behind everything you see and read.
TD’s agenda is to keep readers focused on topics near and dear to the hearts of both the authors and the management team, and those of the readers as well.
Therein we see that readers are kept informed of the latest shenanigans of various companies, corporations, and a lot of government stupidity. (Feckless, my ass!) In some manner, by staying aware of a subset of society’s problems, it is hoped that someone reading these pages will actually be in a position to start the ball rolling towards a remedy. (Or at the minimus, some reader will potentially know who can start some action of some kind.) For what? Who cares, just so long as something is being done to correct even the tiniest part of all the crap we see very bleeping day.
Now you know. And my retort is, were you expecting this particular kind of answer?
It does feel kind of willful on DonerHaus’s part to induce a “Hey, wait a minute” effect on people. Is it ethical? Eh. Is it legal? Probably.
Re:
I dunno, the branding is generic enough to not cause that much cognitive dissonance, and, well…
It DOES say Döner Haus on the logo.
Kinda hard not to make a distinction when your branding requires, first, basic literacy, and second, being able to differentiate between two things from simply READING.
I can see the confusion already...
‘No fair, I came for the sausage and I got a sausage instead!’
Copying logo styles
I think there’s a case to be made about intentionally copying another company’s logo and font style. Is it legal? Like people are saying, of course it is, as long as the companies are different.
But is it right and ethical to take someone else’s branding and apply it to your own company?
Would Disney sue me if I used the distinctive Disney font in my company’s branding? You know, the font that everyone associates with Disney, but which I’m using to get more attention simply because of the font’s association with Disney?
Re:
Back when font styles are a thing, and were copyrightable, your thinking might’ve been on target. However, Microsoft took the wind out of that particular sail by releasing TrueType fonts, and literally made them public domain. Their only ‘hold’ is that no one can actually charge money for them in any way or fashion.
Out of the thousands of fonts and font styles available to us, about 98% of the population chooses either Arial (san serif), Times Roman (serif) or something outlandishly difficult to read. Companies that choose the latter are not helping themselves.
Döner Haus looks pretty easy to read to me. The fact that Pornhub chose to also make their name/logo readable, that’s a non-starter. Otherwise, every book publisher on the planet would be suing each other for “using my font to confuse buyers”…. even though they all use Times Roman or a some minutely different variation.
Both are dealing in the segment of pleasures of the flesh, so maybe there’s chance for some confusion.
“Both are dealing in the segment of pleasures of the flesh, so maybe there’s chance for some confusion.”
I have never once whipped out my junk in anticipation, going to a kebab shop. If someone’s confused, then someone else needs to come get their absent-minded grand-dad.
Wait…huh?
Appears to me that porn hub would gain from such a parody. Not loose.