Lecturer's Name Dr.

Noor Azlin Ismail

Course Code MGM4178-2

Course Name FRANCHISE
MANAGEMENT
Due date 12th July 2020
NAME & Matric SM ASHIBUR HASNAT
Number 195603
NAME & Matric MA JIAN CHENG 195664
Number
 BURGER KING
 Trademark:
"Trademarks" are the logos, names or images that are utilized to allude to an item or items. These
imprints are the distinctive logos, names or images that are utilized by a business to separate
their item or administration from their competitor's. Envision the crown that represents Burger
King. The motivation behind trademark law is to maintain a strategic distance from the disarray
of general society in the commercial centre and to ensure the altruism that has been picked up by
the utilization of the logo, name or image. For instance, Burger King is a significant trademark of
a national cheeseburger chain. In the event that a cheeseburger eatery needed to open with the
name "Burger Sovereign", this would almost certainly comprise an encroaching trademark.
Trademarks are enlisted with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Burger king Trademarks list:
 BURGER KING®
 BURGER KING & Crescent Design
 WHOPPER®
 AMERICA'S FAVORITE BURGER®
 ANGRY WHOPPER®
 BK®
 BK Logo Your Way®
 BURGER KING & Crescent Design
 BURGER KING & Crescent Design YOUR WAY
 CROISSAN'WICH®
 CROWN STANDARD®
 FLAME GRILLED & Design
 HAVE IT YOUR WAY®
 HAVE IT YOUR WAY (Stylized)
 Heritage Man Logo
 HOME OF FLAME BROILING®
 HOME OF THE WHOPPER®
 KING DEALS®
 KING JR®
 RODEO®
 TASTE IS KING®
 WHOPPER JR. Logo
 WHOPPER Logo
 PRETZEL BACON KING™
  STACKER KING™
 BACON KING™
 Single Quarter Pound KING™
 Double Quarter Pound KING™
 EGG-NORMOUS BURRITO™

 The Burger King Case:

In 1953, the national establishment Burger King (The National Burger King) opened the
principal "Burger King" eatery in Jacksonville, Florida. In July 1959, they enrolled their
trademark, Burger King, under Illinois state law. In July 1961, The National Burger King opened
their first Illinois "Burger King" café. That equivalent year, The National Burger King got
Government Enrollment for their trademark, "Burger King.”
Application for Enrollment of the Establishment
Preceding making an application to enlist the establishment, the Franchisor should initially
guarantee that the trademark or administration mark pertinent to the establishment is
appropriately enrolled as per the Exchange Imprints Act 1976 if the protected innovation is
registrable. On account of an outside Franchisor, the remote Franchisor must guarantee that the
trademark or administration mark pertinent to the outside establishment is appropriately enlisted
in its nation of birthplace. Upon the fulfillment of the enrollment of the important trademark or
administration mark, an application to enlist the establishment might be made to the Recorder.
The application is to be presented by the Franchisor to the Recorder, and must be joined by the
accompanying reports and data:

 Complete disclosure documents;

 A copy or sample of the franchise agreement;
 The operation and training manuals of the franchise;
 A copy of the latest audited accounts, financial statements and reports, if any,
of the auditors and directors of the applicant; and
 Such other additional information or documents as may be required by the
Registrar for the purpose of determining the application.

In addition to the submission of the above, all of which are as prescribed by the FA
1998, the following documents are also required to be submitted by the applicant:

 Registration application form;

 Certificate of Incorporation;
 Forms 24 and 49;
 The Franchisor’s organizational chart with the names and position of key
personnel; and
 The Franchisor ’s business brochures,

Trademark Type: Franchise-Specific

Word Mark Burger King

Slogan or Tagline Mark “Be Your Way,”

Logo Mark

Combination Mark
 Burger King Logo Evolution.

 BURGER KING Copyrights:

All trademarks, logos, and service marks displayed on the Website are registered and
unregistered Trademarks of BKC and/or third parties who have authorized their use (collectively
the “Trademarks”). The following trademarks are owned by BKC: BURGER KING, BURGER
KING Bun Halves & Crescent Logo, Social Crown Design, SINCE 1954 Grilling King Heritage
Mark, TASTE IS KING, EL SABOR ES EL REY, HAVE IT YOUR WAY, A TU MANERA,
BE YOUR WAY, KING DEALS, WHOPPER, WHOPPER JR., HOME OF THE WHOPPER,
BIG KING, SATISFRIES, TENDERCRISP, TENDERGRILL and CROISSAN’WICH. No one
can use, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit, distribute, or modify these
Trademarks in any way. The use of BKC’s trademarks on any other website is strictly prohibited.
All of the materials contained on the Websites are copyrighted except where explicitly noted
otherwise. BKC will aggressively enforce its intellectual property rights to the fullest extent of
the law, including the seeking of criminal prosecution. BKC neither warrants nor represents that
your use of materials displayed on the Websites will not infringe rights of third parties not owned
by or affiliated with BKC. Use of any materials on the Websites is at your own risk.
Register copyright:
To register a work, submit a completed application form, and a nonreturnable copy or copies of
the work to be registered. See Circular 1,
  Copyright Basics, section.
 Registration Procedures.
 Circular.
 Copyright Office Fees.

 File a Patent in 8 Steps:

1. Search the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Before you invest another dollar or
minute of your time, use this search engine to make sure your idea hasn't already been patented.
Make sure your idea is something you can patent using this resource from the USPTO.
2. Find a patent attorney. The application process can be made much simpler with the assistance
of an experienced attorney, who can also help you avoid mistakes that could prove costly later
on. Stephen Key has a great resource here on what to look for in a patent attorney.
3. Determine what type of patent you need. Do you need a Utility, Design, or Plant patent? This
will guide the process you'll use to apply for the patent.
4. File a provisional patent application. This offers a layer of protection in case someone later
claims they had the idea before you did. As Issie Lapowsky points out, U.S patent law is a first-
to-file system, not first-to-invent. You have to move fast, or you're screwed.
5. Become a Registered eFiler. You can file your patent application by mail or by fax, but the
easiest way to do it online through the USPTO website. Get your eFiler registration out of the
way and read up on their most recent filing resources to make sure you know what's expected of
your application. 6. Gather information for your formal application. You're going to have to
prepare a specification, which includes an abstract, background, summary, a detailed description
and your conclusion, including the ramifications and scope. In addition, you're going to have to
define the legal scope of your patent and again, I'd advise you to use an experienced patent
attorney unless you're 100% confident you have the skills and experience to handle this on your
own.
7. Complete and review your formal application. It takes one to three years, on average, for a
patent application to process. You don't want it rejected for unnecessary errors or simple
mistakes, so make sure you get it as close to right as possible the first time.
8. Participate in the patent process. You'll have one patent examiner assigned to your case. If you
receive any correspondence or requests from them, respond as soon as you possibly can. Keep in
mind that if you have an attorney, the USPTO will communicate directly with them, so you'll
need to get your updates there. You can help move things along faster by being proactive in
communicating with the patent examiner; consider arranging an interview to address any of their
concerns (you can do this by video conference).
If your application is rejected twice, you can file an appeal with the Patent Trial and Appeal
Board.
How Burger King take legal action towards infringement of
intellectual property rights
Introduction

The legal issues of Burger King include several legal disputes and lawsuits involving the

international fast food restaurant chain Burger King (BK) as both plaintiff and defendant in the
years since its founding in 1954. These have involved almost every aspect of the company's
operations. Depending on the ownership and executive staff at the time of these incidents, the
company's responses to these challenges have ranged from a conciliatory dialog with its critics
and litigants to a more aggressive opposition with questionable tactics and negative
consequences. The company's response to these various issues has drawn praise, scorn, and
accusations of political appeasement from different parties over the years.

A diverse range of groups have raised issues, such as People for the Ethical Treatment of
Animals(PETA), over the welfare of animals, governmental and social agencies over health
issues and compliance with nutritional labeling laws, and unions and trade groups over labor
relations and laws. These situations have touched on the concepts of animal rights, corporate
responsibility and ethics, as well as social justice. While the majority of the disputes did not
result in lawsuits, in many of the cases the situations raised legal questions, dealt with statutory
compliance, or resulted in legal remedies such as changes in contractual procedure or binding
agreements between parties. The resolutions to these legal matters have often altered the way the
company interacts and negotiates contracts with its suppliers and franchisees or how it does
business with the public.

Further controversies have occurred because of the company's involvement in the Middle East.
The opening of a Burger King location in the Israeli-occupied territories led to a breach of
contractdispute between Burger King and its Israeli franchise; the dispute eventually erupted into
a geopolitical conflagration involving Muslim and Jewish groups on multiple continents over the
application of and adherence to international law. The case eventually elicited reactions from the
members of the 22-nation Arab League; the Islamic countries within the League made a joint
threat to the company of legal sanctions including the revocation of Burger King's business
licenses within the member states' territories. A second issue involving members of the Islamic
faith over the interpretation of the Muslim version of Canon Law, Shariah, regarding the
promotional artwork on a dessert package in the United Kingdom raised issues of cultural
sensitivity, and, with the former example, posed a larger question about the lengths that
companies must go to insure the smooth operation of their businesses in the communities they
serve.

A trademark dispute involving the owners of the identically named Burger King in Mattoon,

Illinoisled to a federal lawsuit; the case's outcome helped define the scope of the Lanham
act and trademark law in the United States. An existing trademark held by a shop of the same
name in South Australia forced the company to change its name in Australia, while another state
trademark in Texas forced the company to abandon its signature product, the Whopper, in
several counties around San Antonio. The company was only able to enter northern Alberta,
in Canada, in 1995, after it paid the founders of another chain named Burger King.[1]

Legal decisions from other suits have set contractual law precedents in regards to long-arm
statutes, the limitations of franchise agreements, and ethical business practices; many of these
decisions have helped define general business dealings that continue to shape the entire
marketplace.

Cases of note
Burger King Corporation v. Hungry Jack's Pty LimitedEdit

Main article: Burger King Corporation v Hungry Jack's Pty Ltd

A sign outside a Hungry Jack'slocation in Sydney, Australia

When Burger King moved to expand its operations into

Australia in the early 1970s, its business name was
already trademarked by a takeaway food shop
in Adelaide. As a result, Burger King provided the
Australian franchisee, Jack Cowin, with a list of
possible alternative names derived from pre-existing
trademarks already registered by Burger King and its
then corporate parent Pillsbury that could be used to
name the Australian restaurants. Cowin selected
the Hungry Jack brand name, one of Pillsbury's US pancake mixture products, and slightly
changed the name to the possessive form,  Hungry Jack's. The first Australian franchise of
Burger King Corporation was established in Perth in 1971, under the auspices of Cowin's new
company Hungry Jack's Pty, Limited.

In 1990, Hungry Jack's renewed its franchise agreement with then BK parent Burger King
Corporation, which allowed Hungry Jack's to license third party franchisee. One of the terms and
conditions of the renewed agreement required Hungry Jack's to open a minimum number of new
locations each year for the duration of the contract. Shortly after the Australian trademark on the
Burger King name lapsed in 1996, Burger King requested that Cowin rebrand the Hungry Jack's
locations to Burger King, which Cowin declined. Burger King Corporation accused Hungry
Jack's of violating the conditions of the renewed franchise agreement by failing to expand the
chain at the rate defined and sought to terminate the agreement. Under the aegis of this claim,
Burger King Corporation, in partnership with Royal Dutch Shell's Australian division Shell
Company of Australia Ltd., began to open its own stores in 1997 beginning in Sydney and
extending throughout the regions of New South Wales, Australian Capital Territory and Victoria.
In addition, BK sought to limit HJ's ability to open new locations in the country, whether they
were corporate locations or third-party licensees.
As a result of Burger King's actions, Hungry Jack's owner Jack Cowin and his private holding
company Competitive Foods Australia began legal proceedings in 2001 against Burger King's
parent Burger King Corporation with a counter-claim that the company had violated the
conditions of the master franchising agreement and was in breach of the contract. In a decision
handed down by the Supreme Court of New South Wales that affirmed Cowin's claims, Burger
King was determined to have violated the terms of the contract and as a result was required to
pay Cowin and Hungry Jack's a A$46.9 million (US$41.6 million 2001) award.The court's
decision was one of the first major cases in Australia that implied that the American legal
concept of good faith negotiations existed with the framework of the Australian legal system,
which until that verdict, had rarely been seen in the country's courts. In its decision, the Court
stated that Burger King had failed to act in good faith during contract negotiations by seeking to
include standards and clauses that would engineer a default of the franchise agreement, allowing
the company to limit the number of new Hungry Jack's branded restaurants and ultimately claim
the Australian market as its own, a purpose that was extraneous to the agreement.

After Burger King Corporation lost the case, it decided to terminate its operations in the country,
and in July 2002, the company transferred its assets to its New Zealand franchise group, Trans-
Pacific Foods (TPF).The terms of the sale had TPF assume oversight of the Burger King
franchises in the region as the Burger King brand's master franchisee. Trans-Pacific Foods
administered the chain's 81 locations until September 2003 when the new management team of
Burger King Corporation reached an agreement with Hungry Jack's Pty Ltd to re-brand the
existing Burger King locations to Hungry Jack's and make HJP the sole master franchisee of both
brands. An additional part of the agreement required Burger King Corporation to provide
administrative and advertising support as to insure a common marketing scheme for the company
and its products.Trans-Pacific Foods transferred its control of the Burger King franchises to
Hungry Jack's Pty Ltd, which subsequently renamed the remaining Burger King locations
as Hungry Jack's.
How Burger King DEVELOP THEIR
FAMOUS Logo

 Burger King is the one of the largest and most famous food
chains in the world today. The company was originated by James McLamore and David
Edgerton as Insta Burger King, in USA. The Burger King logo was introduced in 1967, and
almost looks the same; a rounded figure with tilted fonts painted in catchy colors. The logo
consists of two halves of a bun with the name of the company in the center. The Burger King
logo has remained increasingly illustrious at all times. The initial logo contained ochre colored
buns with a dull blue swoosh, which later altered to bright blue, and then was changed back to a
dull blue all over again. The ultimate Burger King logo is circular in shape with reddish-purple
font color.

DESIGN ELEMENTS OF BURGER KING LOGO

The Burger King logo demonstrates an alluring and vivacious image of a fast food restaurant,
which is ideal for the fast food culture amongst the teenagers. The sparkling colors used in the
logo are vibrant enough to draw attention of the spectators.  

Shape of the Burger King Logo: The Burger King logo appears as a tilted round figure with bun
halves on both sides of the logo and the font is inscribed in the centre with a whirl, showcasing
the entire logo. It accurately projects the sparkling features of the company. 

Color of the Burger King Logo: The three colors utilized in the Burger King logo are red, yellow
and blue. The exquisiteness of the three basic colors forms a striking symbol adequate enough to
pull people towards it, irrespective of their ages.  Font of the Burger King Logo: The font used in
the Burger King logo depicts clarity and simplicity. It is burgundy in color with capital letters
enclosed in the circular shape, between the half buns. The logo is very exceptionally attractive
and eye-catching. The font size of ‘KING’ is a little bigger than that of ‘BURGER’, enhancing
the beauty of the logo. The Burger King logo, besides being the most recognized fast food chain
emblems and representing one of the most popular food chains, also managed to retain its
standardized look throughout the years. The logo is simple in design and is eminent not only
amongst the youth, but also appeals to the adults. The emblem has proved to be a guarantor of
the quality and goodwill of the brand.
Reference:

https://www.lanardandassociates.com/blog/2016/07/what-are-copyrights-trademarks-patents/

https://mahwengkwai.com/registration-franchises-malaysia/

https://www.ipguy.com/home/what-is-intellectual-property/what-is-a-trademark/how-do-i-trademark-
a-name/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burger_King_legal_issues
https://inkbotdesign.com/history-of-the-burger-king-logo-design/