"Burger King in Sweden is trolling them with a Better than Big Macs menu."

Not Big Mac's what?

Gůd yaab spōting dot ǽror en derr grammärskjefűrgen!!

Bork bork bork.

Det är precis så vi låter. Hela bunten. 😁

I have a couple of silvers to give away to the first 2 members who want them.

???

While hilarious, it does sound like Big M got fucked -

McDonald’s, which sells its flagship “Big Mac” burgers internationally, submitted printouts of European websites as evidence, as well as posters, packaging, and affidavits from company representatives attesting to “Big Mac” sales in Europe.

The EUIPO said the affidavits from McDonald’s needed to be supported by other types of evidence, and that the websites and other promotional materials did not provide that support.
That seems like bullshit though
“You aren’t using your Trademark.” “Here is billions in advertising for us using it to sell this thing we sell billions of.” “Nope, don’t see it. You lose.”

I had the same impression.

I agree with the first half of the ruling; that Supermac's did not infringe the trademark and should be free to conduct/expand their business. However the official rationale for voiding the Big Mac trademark arouses in me a certain incredulity.

Did the committee have a pre-existing agenda here or was McD's outmanouvered in the lobbying/bribery game? Enquiring dolemites want to know.

The issue apparently is that they didn't provide any evidence that anyone actually *bought* a Big Mac in Europe, or that it was even possible to do so. Advertising a product is one thing but they basically failed to demonstrate the product actually exists on a consumer level. Which is a pretty pedantic detail, but this is international trademark law and it tends to hinge on pedantic details.

Pedantic is exactly the right word.

So, what you're saying is there are several dead McDonald's lawyers rotting in some ditch somewhere?

Ah, this would have made a perfect +10 Trollfood.