Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

Does anyone else find the trademarks on United menus super tacky?

Does anyone else find the trademarks on United menus super tacky?

Old Feb 9, 2018, 7:55 am
  #16  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Morris County, NJ
Programs: UA 1K/*G, Avis Pres, Marriott Plat
Posts: 2,296
Originally Posted by FlytheTail
What's that thread about "what's the smallest thing you can complain about"? Or is that in a different forum?
... and we wonder why UA Insider has disappeared? Complaints like this are just inane.
dmurphynj is offline  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 8:02 am
  #17  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: PHL
Programs: UA 1K 1MM, Marriott Gold, IHG Platinum, Raddison Platinum, Avis Presidents Club
Posts: 5,258
Originally Posted by donFlier
Relevant pic attached. This feels super tacky to me and totally ruins any sort of premium feel for menus especially in business or first.
I think the quotes and the tradmark makes it look cluttered.
I think it would be more tacky if there was no menu or the menu was printed on tissue paper or if you asked for something on the menu and they told you they didnt have it. I do think its tacky that you have to look in the menu to know that you can get a gel pillow, mattress pad, pajamas and the FA's don't proactively offer.
eng3 is online now  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 8:17 am
  #18  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
Originally Posted by TA
So, a foreign carrier operating in the US doesn't have to abide by US laws when in the US (if they apply in this case)?

By that logic, why doesn't UA strip out the trademark symbols because they fly to Japan?
Not a question as easily answered as you may think. It's all about who pays attention to what.

Consider that nobody thought it was significant that Marriott referred to Taiwan under a list of "countries" where it does business until China made it an issue. Same thing here. Perhaps some distributor raised it as an issue to one US carrier and they all then agreed to do it to keep the peace.

Bear in mind that there is a mutual benefit and distributors either provide or provide at a discount in order to have their product served because it's a good way to expand its market.
Often1 is offline  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 8:20 am
  #19  
Hilton Contributor BadgeHyatt Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In the air
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, Bonvoy LT Plat, Hilton Diamond, GHA Tit, BA Gold, Turkish Elite
Posts: 8,686
You're accusing a US Business Class product of appearing tacky? I raise a glass of faux champagne in a plastic cup to you, Sir.
worldtrav, chrisny2, wrp96 and 2 others like this.
EuropeanPete is online now  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 8:41 am
  #20  
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 674
Originally Posted by Often1
The choice for a US carrier is simple. If the carrier simply lists "rum" or "Woodford Bourbon" there is no reason to acknowledge the TM. But, if the menu lists "Woodford Reserve Kentucky Straight Borbon Whiskey" that is a TM and any marginally sane US business would acknowledge the TM. If you look at the DL menu above, you will see that DL does not TM the rum because it is simply Baccardi Rum, but it does TM the Woodfords.

If obeying US TM rules dating back 60+ years is tacky, OP is absolutely right to see it as tacky. But, it really should be moved to the thread suggested in #11 where it can be compared to the misfortunes of people deprived of BP's with a giold stripe and hot towels which lack sufficient thread count.
I think its an interesting point.

I've certainly seen the trademark stuff on chain restaurant menus, but no fine dining establishment will have it.

I wonder if it's simply not enforced, or if the rule is that you must only follow it if your company exceeds X number of employees or revenue.
jamesinclair is offline  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 8:49 am
  #21  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Programs: BA Bronze, United 1K, HH Gold, SPG Platinum, Marriott Platinum
Posts: 3,477
Well, I have to say that I never look at the list of alcoholic beverages because I keep to Champagne, wine and Port. I wish they would list the Champagne on their wine list and have the wines listed available.
StuckinITH is offline  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 9:22 am
  #22  
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: LAS
Programs: 3 MMer
Posts: 458
Originally Posted by StuckinITH
...and have the wines listed available.
"I'm sorry sir, but that particular wine is not available on today's flight, however we do have a wonderful house blend that I think you'll enjoy!"
Two Bee is offline  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 9:41 am
  #23  
nnn
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: San Francisco
Programs: All-Around Kettle
Posts: 3,287
Could be that the distributor contractually requires the airline to include the (R) symbol as part of the deal.
drewguy likes this.
nnn is offline  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 9:56 am
  #24  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
Originally Posted by sexykitten7
I'd rather not see them as they're distracting, not tacky per se. I wonder if they're legally required?
They aren't. Using a trademark to describe a product being served is a clear fair use.

However, large trademark holders like United often are not fans of fair use doctrine and their legal departments often don't want them to avail themselves of it.
dilanesp is offline  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 9:58 am
  #25  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
Originally Posted by Often1
The choice for a US carrier is simple. If the carrier simply lists "rum" or "Woodford Bourbon" there is no reason to acknowledge the TM. But, if the menu lists "Woodford Reserve Kentucky Straight Borbon Whiskey" that is a TM and any marginally sane US business would acknowledge the TM. If you look at the DL menu above, you will see that DL does not TM the rum because it is simply Baccardi Rum, but it does TM the Woodfords.

If obeying US TM rules dating back 60+ years is tacky, OP is absolutely right to see it as tacky. But, it really should be moved to the thread suggested in #11 where it can be compared to the misfortunes of people deprived of BP's with a giold stripe and hot towels which lack sufficient thread count.
There is no "rule" that requires the use of the trademark symbol when it is a fair use. United could not be sued for infringement if it removed them.

It is possible that the contract with the vendor requires the use though.
chrisny2 likes this.
dilanesp is offline  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 11:02 am
  #26  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Madison NJ; Watopia
Posts: 3,161
+1 for tacky (or goofy). United doesn't need to print the symbols unless they're party to some agreement that says so. So long as the copyright holders are ringing up sales, I'd estimate there's about a 0% litigation risk to United if they omit the symbols.

To me, it feels more like "No cheap well brands on our menu. We may be a U.S. carrier, but our booze is premium."
drewguy likes this.
767-322ETOPS is offline  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 11:12 am
  #27  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Programs: UA GS and 1MM; SPG/Marr Plat; Hilton Gold
Posts: 140
It's the prudent way to use other's trademarks from a legal perspective. Someone move this to the, "What's the stupidest, least substantive thing you can complain about?" thread.
9elf S is offline  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 11:28 am
  #28  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: GVA (Greater Vancouver Area)
Programs: DREAD Gold; UA 1.035MM; Bonvoy Au-197; PCC Elite+; CCC Elite+; MSC C-12; CWC Au-197; WoH Dis
Posts: 52,110
Originally Posted by TA
So, a foreign carrier operating in the US doesn't have to abide by US laws when in the US (if they apply in this case)?
Anything published in Japan does not need to follow U.S. copyright rules, just as anything published in the U.S. does not need to follow Japanese copyright rules. (This assumes the documents in question aren't intended for sale in the other country.)
mahasamatman is offline  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 11:54 am
  #29  
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: USA
Programs: UA Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 1,166
The trademark symbols do make the menu appear cluttered but I expect United is just complying with the trademark owners' (e.g., Jack Daniels or Miller or Heineken) wishes. Really kind of a petty complaint IMO.
ExplorerWannabe is offline  
Old Feb 9, 2018, 12:27 pm
  #30  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 810
Absolutely tacky, but such is the world we live in
Hengilas is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.