ESSAY: BBA 3210-15P-SP20L-S1, Business Law

Burger King, the national franchise, is banned from opening a restaurant within 20 miles of Mattoon, Illinois. So, there is not a Burger King there; no problem, right? Not so fast! In the late 1950s, Gene and Betty Hoots trademarked the iconic name. Well, they trademarked it in Illinois at least. When the national company decided to open a chain close by, the Hoots sued and won their case. However, the national chain was able to keep the name Burger King, but the Hoots were also able to keep the name in accordance with the stipulation that the national chain could not open a store within a 20-mile radius of the original store in Mattoon, Illinois.

In a minimum of 500 words, explain the reasons why this decision was made, and discuss the significance of this case in U.S. trademark law jurisprudence.

For this assignment, please find one article from the CSU Online Library that discusses intellectual property; elaborate on how the article relates to the Burger King case to support your answer. Identify the main issues with copyright and trademark in the article, and explain how these issues were either upheld or overturned.

Cite any direct quotes or paraphrased material from the article. Use APA format.

ANSWER

The law intervenes in social and economic relations by introducing limits to the actions of one party to another. The law of tort plays a central role in ensuring respect for human rights and property rights by identifying possible damage caused by one party to the other. Indeed, every country has a set of rules that protect property and individual rights by controlling business operations. The case shows a dilemma on the infringement of Burger King’s trademark by Gene and Betty Hoots in Illinois. The purpose of this study is to analyze the reasons for restricting Burger King from opening an outlet 20-mile radius of the original store in Mattoon. The paper also explores the significance of this case in U.S. trademark law jurisprudence.             The law is particular on the need for companies to follow legal procedures in business operations. Indeed, some businesses have been subjected to legal costs after establishment, which has a significant impact on performance.  There was negligence on the disclaimer made by Burger King during the advertisement. Indeed, fraud was promoted by the lack of research by both Gene and Betty Hoots. In law, negligence implies that there is a substantial lack of care on something that results in damage. Gene and Betty Hoots seems to operate inoffensively in Illinois to the extent of influencing the court to include geographical protection in the trademark. There is confusion about the protection of the trademark in this case. Trademarks entail the security of business name, symbol, or words in identifying the source of goods (Çela, 2015). As a result, it enhances the identification of producers from others, which in some instances has been a source of competitive advantage on reputation. However, the Hoots claim the name of a renowned company, which limits its operation within a specified radius. The law rules in favor of the defendant to protect geographical coverage of the business and consumer welfare. This arrangement by the law does not satisfy the need for…