26.09.2006

MarkenThema

Farce over American ‘Freedom Fries’ and a Trademark Consequence

Wiener Schnitzel should be called Euroschnitzel in future. That has been decided by the German Government in the last week after Austria had made known its exit from the EU. Yes, you have just read a bogus news item. It is not the case that Austria has left the EU or that Wiener Schnitzel should be re-named. It’s just a matter of trying to present a European analogy to the American farce over re-naming of ‘French Fries’ into ‘Freedom Fries’.

The dispute over the concept ‘French Fries’, the American name for what are called chips in Britain or pommes frites in France and Germany, definitely falls within the scope typically encompassed by trademark and name law. Because in 2003 the fried potato strips were due to be renamed  at once and with patriotic gusto, by a decision of Congress, into ‘Freedom Fries’, a decision rooted in an  anti-French atmosphere whipped up by the refusal of the French to take part in the Iraq war,
 
At the American Trademark Office, an argument over the name ‘Freedom Fries’ is now forming an epilog with true trademark features. Restaurant owner Neal Rowland and the Canadian company Grand Forest Holdings Inc are currently engaged in a dispute over the concept.  It is a matter of priority from the year 2003. The trademark application from Grand Forest dates from 28th February 2003, while Rowland say they have used their ‘Freedom Fries’ since 12th February 2003. On 19th February 2003 an article had appeared on www.cnn.com under the title “Fried politics: Restaurant serves ‘freedom fries’ “.

A total of three active ‘Freedom Fries’ trademarks are recorded in the American register. Four further trademark applications were unsuccessful. Grand Forest had been able to win through by lodging an objection against the original rejection of their application by the Trademark Office. At the end of the day, what we have is possibly  an example of model lobbying on the part of French diplomats. Anyway, a representative of the French Embassy in Washington, Agnes Vonderrmühll, greeted the decision by which both houses of the American Parliament recently withdrew their original edict. Diplomatic relations definitely appear to be more important than potatoes.

In spite of this potato ‘misunderstanding’,  according to the Washington Times, George Bush and Jacques Chirac had eaten ‘French Fries’ together in February 2005. The disagreement had been initiated at the beginning of 2003 by, among others, the Republican representative Bob Ney. As a result, in the Congress cafeteria until this year there was on offer, instead of ‘French Fries’ and ‘French Toast’, only Freedom Fries and Toast.  But  fries are more than just a food stuff. They are a religion. At least one of the founders of McDonalds understood that back in the 60s.

And anyone who wants to wage a struggle against a religion cannot actually win. The patriots and opponents of French tastes received blank incomprehension from all sides. There has already been at least one comparable protest action in the history  of food names in America. The anti-German mood during the First World War led at the time to the re-naming of sauerkraut to ‘liberty cabbage’ and frankfurters to ‘hot dogs’.

rmb / tos

Subscribe to our newsletter
Post a comment

Subscribe to our Newsletter