|
|
Just Winging It.
Hooters Restaurants has made millions touting
waitresses in skimpy shorts and T-shirts, but to borrow from the company's
own slogan, it apparently doesn't have exclusive rights to the
"delightfully tacky, yet unrefined'' look.
At least according to a U.S. District Court judge in
Orlando that ruled Ker's WingHouse, a Largo, Florida based sports bar
chain, did not misappropriate Hooters' dress and store design by adopting
similar concepts.
In its lawsuit filed against WingHouse last year, Hooters argued that
WingHouse had copied too many elements from Hooters and was in violation
of the state's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. Hooters cited in
its complaint that WingHouse girls wear skimpy outfits very similar to the
Hooters' girls and that WingHouse had adopted a very similar motif to
Hooters with lights strung around its restaurants and wooden wall
paneling.
Atlanta-based Hooters of America argued that WingHouse is so similar to
Hooters that customers could get the two mixed up or might assume the
companies are affiliated.
Hooters sought to prevent WingHouse from infringing on Hooters' trade
dress, and it asked the court to award it about $4 million in lost
profits.
No dice said U.S. District Judge Anne Conway, who threw out Hooters'
claims before the case went to the jury.
Conway found that "no reasonable juror'' could confuse WingHouse girls,
who are dressed in all-black shorts and tops, with Hooters girls, who wear
orange shorts and white tops.
Wings anyone?
Source: Tampa Tribune, "Hooters' Look Isn't
Exclusive, Judge Rules," December 3, 2004 .
Return to Laughable
Lawsuits page.
Or check out our Stupid Lawsuit Collection
by clicking here.
Power of Attorneys Home Page.
|
|
