All Questions in International Trademarks >> Tupperware to ask court to shut down critic's webs

Tupperware to ask court to shut down critic's webs

Posted by . updated on 11/11/2009
The Canadian arm of Tupperware Corp., a business built on cheery sales parties at which housewives learned to burp air out of plastic food storage boxes, is going to court today to try to shut down a website it says falsely accuses it of wanting to force its area distributors out of business, disband its party sales force and sell mainly through stores.



Tupperware Canada Inc., based in Markham, Ont., is particularly irate to see its differences with former distributors described as TupperWars, a term it says unlawfully parodies and devalues its trademark. Apart from the defamation motion, the company is suing five Ontario and New Brunswick women (and in some cases their business-partner husbands) for hundreds of thousands of dollars in debts they allegedly left behind when they lost their distributorships.



In documents filed in Ontario Superior Court, it acknowledges "a decline in its business in the last few years" because of "competition for people's time" and shifting consumer tastes, but it disclaims any plan to scrap the party sales method in Canada, as was done last year in Britain.



It will seek a hearing in Toronto this morning to ask a judge for an interim injunction against cyber-critic Les Stewart, a former lawn-service franchisee who has campaigned against what he describes as corporate abuse of small-business operators.



Mr. Stewart, 45, is founder and president of Canadian Alliance of Franchise Operators Inc., which he runs from his home near Barrie, Ont., while offering his services as a franchising expert through its website, www.cafo.net. The site has an extensive Tupperware section.



In court filings, the company demands that it "be immediately inactivated and access to it by the public or others be restrained, prohibited, prevented and/or precluded until such time as all references to Tupperware, its management, business, operations and trademark are removed." It also seeks an order barring CAFO and Mr. Stewart from "disseminating or distributing, in any manner whatsoever, any statements or communications concerning Tupperware, its associated and affiliated companies, and its business and operations."



The case may become a contest between libel and trademark laws and the right to free speech in commercial disputes, but Mr. Stewart says he has yielded temporarily by limiting access to the site while he seeks an adjournment to gain time to prepare a legal counterattack.



Since late last week, the Tupperware section has been protected by a password known only to ex-distributors engaged in disputes with the company and "a few people" in the news media, he said. "We're asking for an adjournment because we've given them [Tupperware] what they wanted, virtually."



It is not clear this will appease the company, which asserts in a court filing that "CAFO and Stewart have communicated with Tupperware distributors in Canada as well as distributors in the United States directing them to the CAFO/Stewart website, ensuring wide dissemination of the false and defamatory statements made therein."



In an affidavit sworn on Thursday, Tupperware Canada managing director Regina White said that although the Tupperware system has worked for 58 years, her experience as an executive and former salesperson "is that the sales force is fragile and susceptible to suggestions, statements and comments such as those contained in the CAFO and Stewart website, which is Internet-based and widely disseminated."



Ms. White, a former regional vice-president of the Florida-based parent company, did not respond to messages left at her Markham office last week, but the company issued a statement through a New York publicist saying it was regretfully suing the five former Canadian distributors after failing to reach a deal with them on alleged debts that included unpaid bills for merchandise. It remains open to "an amicable resolution," it said.



Mr. Stewart described the women as victims of unfair pricing policies and other abuses. "The claims would bankrupt all five of them."

Answers (3)
 
Darrell MacInnis
Watch for developments in this franchisor/franchisee dispute.  In this civil lawsuit, mediation is a legislated requirement. Mediation should take place by the end of November, 2004.  
 
 
eric stasik
Quote
Tupperware Canada Inc., based in Markham, Ont., is particularly irate to see its differences with former distributors described as TupperWars, a term it says unlawfully parodies and devalues its trademark.


TupperWars. That's pretty funny! Parody is normally fair game, satire - poking fun at someone else - can be a bit dodgy, but parody is normally considered protected speech.

Using a trademark for the purposes of parody used to be illegal in France. I remember that Greenpeace once was successfully sued for putting dollar signs in Esso's trademark, but I think the French courts eventually gave them a pass on this since there was no commercial intent to exploit the mark - although they clearly intended to devalue it.

Perhaps Canada has similar laws and hopefully Canadian courts will exercise similar good judgement.

Cheers,

eric stasik
 
 
Isaac
Parody involving a trademark is sometimes not giving the protection
you would expect in a copyright situation.  In particular at
least some courts are fairly hostile to the idea of fair use
when the parody is done in a commercial setting.

My understanding is that Tupperware has already won one
go around in court over "Tupperwars"
 

Related Questions

Use of European CE logo, as Company Trade mark

Use of European CE logo, as Company Trade mark

In International Trademarks    -  updated on 11/11/2009
I want to use the European CE logo as the trade mark of my company.
My business name is something like "Cats & Elephants" thats why i want to use it, as these are the first initials of the company name.
I have no intentions of exporting my products out of country.

If i am not allowed , can i use the logo by having some slight changes in it, for example drawing a round border around the CE Logo or anything like that ?

Any help is appreciated.
Foreign TM Filing

Foreign TM Filing

In International Trademarks    -  updated on 11/11/2009
Client wants to file in a few countries.  So, we go via Madrid, however, I noticed that New Zealand and Mexico are not part of Madrid.  Has anyone filed in these countries?  Can you suggest counsel?  It looks like local counsel is needed because in the registration via New Zealand IP they need a NZ address.   I have not checked for Mexico yet.

Regards,

Why aren

Why aren't section 44(e)

In International Trademarks    -  updated on 11/11/2009
What is the policy reason allowing a foreign company to register a trademark in the USA under 44(e) and then later apply for the exact same trademark in the same category, but based upon 1(b) (intent-to-use)?  Note that when applying under 44(e) the applicant must swear to have the intent to use the mark in the USA.

The intent to use element already exists in the original 44(e) application/registration, so how is the new 1(b) any different? 

Thanks in advance ...
Looking for Source on Use Rights and Registration Rights Countries

Looking for Source on Use Rights and Registration Rights Countries

In International Trademarks    -  updated on 11/11/2009
I'm trying to determine whether Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Kuwait are use rights or registration rights countries.  INTA's resources have not helped me.  Does anyone know of a site or sites that provide this information?  Thanks in advance

J
International Trademark Infringement / IP rights?

International Trademark Infringement / IP rights?

In International Trademarks    -  updated on 11/11/2009
I launched a website about a year ago selling one single product (for exemple: photo books).
A bigger company located in the UK sent me a letter (from the CEO, no attorneys yet) stating that they own the Intellectual Property rights of this product.
They have been in business many years before me and have partnerships with big US websites. They state owning the IP rights, Copyright, general goodwill, visual effect and use of the term "PhotoBooks". After checking, I do see ...