At the intersection of sandwiches, language, and copyright law we find the debate about Subway's claim that the corporation should have exclusive license to the phrase "footlong." Grammar and spelling aside, the Sandwich Experts (for whom I once worked, in 1991-1992) are not likely to win in this case. Partly, it's because their food really tastes bad, when you get right down to it. But mostly, who hasn't walked into a mom-and-pop hoagie/grinder/sub shop sometime in the past five decades and ordered a foot-long turkey-and-swiss with the works, toasted? Outside of the context of sandwiches, as well, would Subway contest the right of others to use the term foot-long to describe hot dogs or cheeseburgers or a part of the human anatomy. Here's an editorial from a Connecticut newspaper taking the Milford-cased Subway to task over all this nonsense.
2/22/11
Eater's Notes - Feet Long Debate
At the intersection of sandwiches, language, and copyright law we find the debate about Subway's claim that the corporation should have exclusive license to the phrase "footlong." Grammar and spelling aside, the Sandwich Experts (for whom I once worked, in 1991-1992) are not likely to win in this case. Partly, it's because their food really tastes bad, when you get right down to it. But mostly, who hasn't walked into a mom-and-pop hoagie/grinder/sub shop sometime in the past five decades and ordered a foot-long turkey-and-swiss with the works, toasted? Outside of the context of sandwiches, as well, would Subway contest the right of others to use the term foot-long to describe hot dogs or cheeseburgers or a part of the human anatomy. Here's an editorial from a Connecticut newspaper taking the Milford-cased Subway to task over all this nonsense.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment