Adbusters

McCarriage of Justice

How many strikes should a corporation be allowed before we, the public, revoke their charter?

Fast food giant McDonald’s has just been handed a stunning defeat by a Malaysian high court in an epic trademark dispute. The ruling ended an eight-year battle in which the megacorporation attempted to prevent a small curry restaurant from using the prefix “Mc” in its name. McCurry (which stands for “Malaysian Chicken Curry”) argued that it had every right to use the two consonants and that McDonald’s claim that the two restaurants could be confused was unfounded. McCurry offers an Indian menu (including, among other things, fish head curry) while McDonald’s sticks to arguably less palatable “Western” fare. In addition to granting McCurry the rights to the disputed prefix, the court ordered McDonald’s to pay all legal costs incurred by the defendant. McDonald’s has a history of attacking anyone who dares string the two letters together: the company has previously brought legal action against a curry restaurant in Jamaica and the Oxford English Dictionary for listing the definition of “McJob.” Hopefully having its McAss handed to it by Malaysia’s highest court will end the corporation’s global monopoly on the two letters, allowing small business owners and a good part of Scotland to breathe easy.

But what can we do to prevent bullying megacorporations from treating the world like one giant school yard? For every Malaysian McCurry there are untold numbers of little guys slain by corporate Goliaths. For every staggering judgment (like Pfizer’s recent $2.3 billion settlement with the FDA) there are a slew of shady backroom deals in which corporations make a mint at the public’s expense. How many strikes should a corporation be allowed before we, the public, are allowed to revoke their charter? What are some effective ways for civil society to fight back against corporate power?

Sarah Nardi

Adbusters 111 Cover

On Newsstands December 3

At last we’re in Winter. It’s the year 2047. A worn scrapbook from the future arrives in your lap. It offers a stunning global vision, a warning to the next generations, a repository of practical wisdom, and an invaluable roadmap which you need to navigate the dark times, and the opportunities, which lie ahead.

Subscribe to Adbusters Magazine

192 comments on the article “McCarriage of Justice”

Displaying 31 - 40 of 192

Page 4 of 20

very dissapoint...

A more wordy version of sticking your fingers in your ears and singling la la la la la. Nice one! I see the mental environment around here is vast and deep. Logic is soooooooooooooooo last year. :)

very dissapoint...

A more wordy version of sticking your fingers in your ears and singling la la la la la. Nice one! I see the mental environment around here is vast and deep. Logic is soooooooooooooooo last year. :)

McAnonymous

Thank you for so completely confirming my points and my argument. I think we're about done here folks. Chalk one up for common sense - ZERO for adbuster hipster "culture jammers."

McAnonymous

Thank you for so completely confirming my points and my argument. I think we're about done here folks. Chalk one up for common sense - ZERO for adbuster hipster "culture jammers."

Anonymous

Why is it so pointless to discuss the origins of relevant ideologies?

Besides, the father's of the left comment wasn't his only point, and you shouldn't write off someone's input just because they make a conclusion you disagree with. Rebut his assertions - everyone benefits from conversation. No one benefits from burying dissent or unpopular perspectives (except proponents of the status quo - you wouldn't want to be lumped with them, would you?)

So which is more pointless?

Anonymous

Why is it so pointless to discuss the origins of relevant ideologies?

Besides, the father's of the left comment wasn't his only point, and you shouldn't write off someone's input just because they make a conclusion you disagree with. Rebut his assertions - everyone benefits from conversation. No one benefits from burying dissent or unpopular perspectives (except proponents of the status quo - you wouldn't want to be lumped with them, would you?)

So which is more pointless?

Anonymous

'Fathers of the left'? that is just hilarious... one of the most warped distortions I have ever come across... get a clue.

Anonymous

'Fathers of the left'? that is just hilarious... one of the most warped distortions I have ever come across... get a clue.

McAnonymous

Read a book my friend. Today's leftists trace their roots back to Progressivism which is a flavour of fascism. The headliners of that group were Woodrow Wilson (the first fascist - much admired and imitated by Mussolini and Hitler alike) and FDR (father of the "New Deal" and the creepy Blue Eagle program). OUCH.

McAnonymous

Read a book my friend. Today's leftists trace their roots back to Progressivism which is a flavour of fascism. The headliners of that group were Woodrow Wilson (the first fascist - much admired and imitated by Mussolini and Hitler alike) and FDR (father of the "New Deal" and the creepy Blue Eagle program). OUCH.

Pages

Add a new comment

Comments are closed.