Beef squashed: McDonald’s loses Big Mac trademark fight with Hungry Jack’s

Key Points:

• McDonald’s Australia loses trademark court case against Hungry Jack’s over Big Jack burger.
• Federal Court dismisses McDonald’s claim of trademark infringement.
• Hungry Jack’s found to breach consumer law in advertising about Big Jack’s beef content.

After a long and expensive three-year battle, Hungry Jack’s has emerged victorious in the Big Jack trademark dispute against McDonald’s.

In August 2020, McDonald’s Australia filed a lawsuit against Hungry Jack’s, alleging that the fast food chain’s limited edition burgers, the Big Jack and Mega Jack, infringed on McDonald’s trademark for the Big Mac due to their names.

In court, McDonald’s argued that Hungry Jack’s engaged in deceptive conduct and intentionally copied the appearance and ingredients of the Big Mac, thereby violating a registered trademark.

- Advertisement -

Hungry Jack’s chief marketing officer, Scott Baird, testified during the trial that there was an “element of cheekiness” in the choice of the burger name, but it was not selected because of its similarity to McDonald’s burgers.

“I was aware that the name would likely be perceived as a deliberate taunt of McDonald’s,” he wrote in an affidavit.

Justice Stephen Burnley, the presiding judge, concluded that the “Big Jack” burger was not deceptively similar to the Big Mac and that the strong reputation of the Big Mac made it unlikely for consumers to be confused or deceived.

- Advertisement -

In its lawsuit, McDonald’s also alleged that Hungry Jack’s had misled consumers through a series of television advertisements by claiming that the Big Jack contained 25% more Australian beef than the Big Mac.

After experts conducted tests and weighed the different burger patties, the judge determined that Hungry Jack’s burgers contained significantly less than the advertised 25% additional beef, and the company had violated consumer law through its marketing.