@[email protected]M to Science [email protected]English • 4 days agoUSA 🇺🇸 USA 🇺🇸 USAmander.xyzimagemessage-square122fedilinkarrow-up11.45K
arrow-up11.45KimageUSA 🇺🇸 USA 🇺🇸 USAmander.xyz@[email protected]M to Science [email protected]English • 4 days agomessage-square122fedilink
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish7•4 days agoI don’t see much difference between the Parmesan case and Apple sueing against a vaguely similiar looking logo.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish2•4 days agoHow so? You can have a cheese that’s a molecular perfect replica of a Parmesan and have no legal issues. You only have problems is you call it Parmesan without following the requirements. To be honest, it seems like the complete opposite issue.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish7•4 days agoi thought the problem would be if they called it parmigiano reggiano, but calling it parmesan was okay
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish1•4 days agoWasn’t it the Beatles sueing Apple and not the other way around?
I don’t see much difference between the Parmesan case and Apple sueing against a vaguely similiar looking logo.
How so? You can have a cheese that’s a molecular perfect replica of a Parmesan and have no legal issues. You only have problems is you call it Parmesan without following the requirements.
To be honest, it seems like the complete opposite issue.
i thought the problem would be if they called it parmigiano reggiano, but calling it parmesan was okay
Both are branding issues?
No, they aren’t.
Wasn’t it the Beatles sueing Apple and not the other way around?