Dum Dums Hopes Tootsie Takes a Licking in Court
There is mutiny aboard the good ship Lollipop.
May 18, 2018 at 10:19 AM
2 minute read
Courthouse News reports that Dum Dums lollipop maker Spangler Candy Company is suing Charms lollipop maker Tootsie Rolls Industries over claims of trade dress infringement and unfair competition. Spangler alleges that Tootsie Roll is deliberately attempting to cause confusion by selling its Charms pops in the same red packaging as Dum Dums.
In the suit, Spangler says Tootsie had been packaging Charms Mini Pops in a yellow bag that made it easily distinguishable from Dum Dums. But a customer tipped off the company that Tootsie had redesigned its packaging, making it look more similar to the red bags of Dum Dums. Additionally, the suit claims that Tootsie has changed the color of its aisle-end display pallet boxes to look more like those of Dum Dums.
“Tootsie's adoption of its new trade dress for its pallet displays for Charms Mini Pops, and its direct and unfair competition against Spangler, will necessarily and permanently alter the market and irreparably harm Spangler,” the complaint asserts.
If the battle of the bags isn't exactly blowing up Twitter, at least one person was relieved to be alerted:
Tbh I was confused and I'm glad I saw this post before I accidentally brought home some mini charms when I wanted some dum dums
— Jess Gee (@jesshereforalaf) May 23, 2018
It's been a particularly litigious year for candy manufacturers. Gummy bears maker Haribo was unsuccessful in its attempt to stop Swiss chocolatier Lindt from selling chocolate golden foil-wrapped teddy bears. Nestle similarly lost a fight against Cadbury after trying to trademark the four-fingered shape of its Kit Kat bars.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLife, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
8 minute read'Entitlement to Information Has Its Limits:' Judge Denies Another Discovery Deadline Extension in Trademark Suit
4 minute read'Unfair Competition'?: Akerman Files Trademark Infringement Lawsuit Against Maryland Nonprofit
2 minute readEx Parte Trademark Appeals to District Court — Lessons Learned from the Front Lines
13 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Semiconductor Component Maker Accused of Deceiving Investors About Market Downturn, Export Curbs
- 2Zuckerman Spaeder Gets Ready to Move Offices in DC, Deploy AI Tools in 2025
- 3Pardoning Jan. 6 Defendants May Send Bad Message About Insurrection, Rule of Law
- 4Looming Clash Over Abortion Pills Shows Overturning 'Roe v. Wade' Settled Nothing
- 53rd Circuit Strikes Down NLRB’s Monetary Remedies for Fired Starbucks Workers
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250