Budweiser Sues Union For 'Budweiser Is Tasteless' Campaigh

Heidelberg is a multi-brand beverage distributor. It's in contract negotiations with the Teamsters, who began a publicity campaign in connection with the discussions, in which campaign the union refers to Heidelberg as 'Budweiser's Distributor.' The union put up highway billboards that say: "Tell Budweiser Heidelberg's Destruction of Ohio Jobs Is Tasteless." From a distance (while driving on a highway), the signs read "Budweiser is Tasteless" (see above). Anheuser Busch now sues the union for trademark dilution and related torts, alleging that it doesn't own or control Heidelberg, that Heidelberg is not A-B's exclusive distributor, and that Bud has not been involved in the contract dispute (actually, getting A-B involved is the likely objective of the campaign). So, with regard to dilution, is the union making trademark use? (see, e.g., Lamparello v. Falwell). As for defamation, what statement should the court analyze? 'Budweiser is Tasteless' or 'Tell Budweiser Heidelberg . . . " or both? Complaint Budweiser is Tasteless //

Read more detail on Recent Advertising Law Posts –

Legal notice about the Budweiser Sues Union For 'Budweiser Is Tasteless' Campaigh rubric : Hukuki Net Legal News is not responsible for the privacy statements or other content from Web sites outside of the Hukuki.net site. Please refer the progenitor link to check the legal entity of this resource hereinabove.

Do you need High Quality Legal documents or forms related to Budweiser Sues Union For 'Budweiser Is Tasteless' Campaigh?

This entry was posted in Advertising Law and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply