Reminds me of the time Pizza Hut took Papa John’s to court over their slogan “Better ingredients, Better pizza, Papa John’s.” Papa John’s’ winning argument was that the slogan is in nature a boastful opinion, as almost all slogans are. They submitted to evidence a search of the US Trademark office’s records of slogans in then-current use, and the only purely factual slogan they could find was Sony’s “It’s A Sony” slogan, which was only purely factual via tautology.
Actually that is the reason they always write it with multiple “i”-s. it gives you “wiiings” not “wings”: https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-29550003 They had to pay $13 million for false advertising in 2014 https://startuptalky.com/red-bull-tagline-history/
Reminds me of the time Pizza Hut took Papa John’s to court over their slogan “Better ingredients, Better pizza, Papa John’s.” Papa John’s’ winning argument was that the slogan is in nature a boastful opinion, as almost all slogans are. They submitted to evidence a search of the US Trademark office’s records of slogans in then-current use, and the only purely factual slogan they could find was Sony’s “It’s A Sony” slogan, which was only purely factual via tautology.