Trade Dress Provides Important Protection for Restaurants and Retailers
Trade dress not only pertains to a product's image, size, shape, color or texture, but also has been expanded to encompass the interior and exterior décor, signage, menu and general "atmosphere" of a restaurant or store. Like a traditional trademark, a company's trade dress is similarly protected by the Lanham Act, writes Morgan Ben-David.
August 18, 2017 at 12:00 AM
5 minute read
Many restaurants and retail establishments are identified by their own décor and interior design, with each element contributing to the overarching atmosphere and brand message. While it is common knowledge that a name and logo can be afforded legal protection under trademark laws, companies far too often overlook the importance of achieving protection over the “look and feel” of their establishments. As businesses begin expanding through franchising and chain operations, and continue building and investing in a brand identity, it is critical to understand how “trade dress” protection can serve as a powerful tool to guide and safeguard such undertakings.
Trade dress not only pertains to a product's image, size, shape, color or texture, but also has been expanded to encompass the interior and exterior décor, signage, menu and general “atmosphere” of a restaurant or store. Like a traditional trademark, a company's trade dress is similarly protected by the Lanham Act.
In the 1992 U.S. Supreme Court case of Two Pesos v. Taco Cabana, 505 U.S. 763 (1992), the court upheld a jury verdict on a claim of trademark infringement in favor of Taco Cabana, a Mexican restaurant chain having a “festive eating atmosphere,” with “interior dining and patio areas decorated with artifacts, bright colors, paintings, murals,” as well as an exterior with a “vivid color scheme” using “border paint and neon stripes,” and “bright awnings and umbrellas.” In its opinion, the court expressly recognized that retail trade dress could qualify as a protectable trademark. Specifically, because Taco Cabana's unique atmosphere and appearance was inherently distinctive, it was able to show a likelihood of confusion in its claim against a competing restaurant that ripped off its concept.
This content has been archived.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
© 2025 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 AllFlorida Court Rules in Favor of Production Co. in Dispute Over Viral Documentary 'Died Suddenly'
Trending Stories
- 1Courts, Lawyers Press On With Business as SoCal Wildfires Rage
- 2Florida, a Political Epicenter, Is the Site of Brownstein Hyatt's 13th Office
- 3Law Firms Close Southern California Offices Amid Devastating Wildfires
- 4Lawsuit alleges racial and gender discrimination led to an Air Force contractor's death at California airfield
- 5Holland & Knight Picks Up 8 Private Wealth Lawyers in Los Angeles
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