Slashdot Mirror
Merck Threatens Merck With Legal Action Over Facebook URL
angry tapir writes with an excerpt from a Techworld article: "Germany's Merck KGaA has threatened legal action after it said it lost its Facebook page apparently to rival Merck & Co. in the U.S., though it has yet to identify defendants in the case. In a filing before the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Merck said it intends to initiate an action based on the apparent takeover of its Facebook page at www.facebook.com/merck by its similarly-named but unrelated competitor, Merck & Co."
Merck was a single German company prior to WWI, their North American assets were seized by the US government in 1917 and is now Merck & Co. What remained in Germany is now Merck KGaA.
For all intensive porpoises your a bunch of rediculous loosers
Merck Germany says it had "an agreement" with Facebook for the name. Later Merck America was running the page. No where in TFA does it says Merck G is suing Merck A, only Facebook. Once again TFS screws up the headline on TFA.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
"Facebook Inc said on Monday that it made a mistake in letting Merck & Co take over a page on the social networking website from its German rival Merck KGaA." - IBTimes
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
For the record, the "McDonalds hot coffee" thing was NOT an example of lawsuit abuse, even though it's commonly trotted out as an example of it.
It's more an example of "McDonalds screwed up, then refused to do anything to make it right, then was sued and lost".
More on it can be found here and if you think she wasn't that badly hurt, check out the picture of the burns here (warning: not safe for lunch).
185F is reasonable for the temperature the coffee is prepared at, not the temperature at which it is served. It should be served closer to 160F. McDonald's was overheating it so that it would stay hot longer (allowing them to serve it for a longer period, and thus make fewer pots over the day).
Furthermore, the woman only asked for $20k, barely enough to cover her medical expenses and lost work hours. She wasn't being greedy at all. It was McDonald's choice to risk a jury trial, and they paid for it. Losing a jury trial should be more expensive than settling, otherwise corporations have no incentive to ever settle with us comparatively short-lived humans.
If you're looking for negligence, it is readily apparent in that case. McDonald's was negligent in not warning the customer that the coffee was dangerously hot. Also, McDonald's was negligent in failing to provide a container that was void of defect... (if you remember the old coffee cups at McDonald's, a mild squeeze, just ever so slightly more pressure than is need to lift it, and the top would pop off, and the coffee would spill all over your hand, burning you). Again, the TEMPERATURE OF THE COFFEE DOESN'T MATTER, it is a red herring. Had the coffee been AS HOT AS THE SUN, as long as they had properly notified customers that it was hot with posted warnings, and provided a defect-free container, then McDonald's MIGHT have had a chance. Unfortunately for McDonald's, they DID NOT have any warnings, and their coffee cups were notoriously defective. The case was valid, and justice was served.
The Admin and the Engineer