An IRAC for this case.(Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion)

Battle of the Tigers

The last business law case we're going over is one between two businesses, namely Kellogg and Exxon. Both Kellogg and Exxon have used similar looking tigers as their logos/mascots since the mid-1900s.

However, Kellogg decided in the early 2000s that they were going to sue Exxon over trademark issues regarding the tiger. They argued that Exxon's tiger was too similar to their own and violated trademark agreements over who owned that imagery.

Trademark law is important for business since it gives companies ownership over logos, phrases, mascots, etc.

For example, it prevents someone from opening up their own coffee shop and calling it "Starbucks" while using the Starbucks logo. This is because those things are trademarked and owned by the Starbucks Corporation.

Kellogg trademarked Tony the Tiger in 1952 while Exxon trademarked their tiger called "Whimsical Tiger" in 1965. Kellogg didn't contest or bring suit against Exxon at that time, and it became incontestable in 1970.

Because of their inaction at the time of the creation of Exxon's cartoon tiger, Exxon's lack of use of the tiger in recent years, and lack of evidence showing any harm caused by Exxon's use of the cartoon tiger, the charges brought by Kellogg were dismissed.