rickfarang Posted September 8, 2006 Report Share Posted September 8, 2006 IMHO, in this case, the copy exceeds the original in quality and value. Actually surprised this didn't come up years ago. --------------- Copy claims spark food fight Pizza Hut consults lawyers over rival PITSINEE JITPLEECHEEP & SRIWIPA SIRIPUNYAWIT The operator of Pizza Hut has accused its arch-rival The Pizza Company of copying its pizza franchise's business concepts and has lodged a formal complaint with the company. Joseph Han, vice-president and country manager of Yum! Restaurants, which runs Pizza Hut, said its legal consultant had sent a formal letter of complaint to The Pizza Company concerning the possibility of remedial action over the alleged use of similar products and promotions. Joseph Han, country manager of Yum! Restaurants International, compares the marketing campaigns of Pizza Hut and rival The Pizza Company at a briefing yesterday. A legal consultant for Yum! has forwarded a formal letter of complaint saying possible remedial action may be pursued. â?? PHRAKRIT JUNTAWONG Pizza Hut said its products and promotions came from innovations by its international parent and sister companies. It claims that the Thai-owned Pizza Company has been quick to follow in terms of product names, products and graphics. For example, Yum! claims Pizza Hut's Amazing 4 Pizzas in December 2002 was copied by The Pizza Company's The Pizza 4-in-1 promotion in 2003. Similar allegations surround the pair's launches in China, where Pizza Hut released an Exotica Pizza in September 2004 and The Pizza Company promoted an Extra Crust Sausage pizza, which had a similar design. In 2005, Pizza Hut launched One-4-Share which Yum! says was copied by The Pizza Company with its X-Pan pizza. Pizza Hut launched its latest two promotions, Cheesy Sausage Bites pizza and Mighty Meat Korean Bulkiki pizza, on May 24 and Aug 23 respectively. Soon after, Yum! claims similar product concepts appeared from The Pizza Company, using slightly different names _ Extra Cheesy Sausage Bites and Korean Meat Deluxe pizza. Mr Han said Yum! had taken action to defend its Pizza Hut brand because consumers could start becoming confused. He would not comment on whether there had been similar action in other countries, saying that he was responsible only for the franchise in Thailand. Mr Han also declined to disclose whether Yum! would take legal action. ''We hope to get positive and possible remedial actions from this,'' he said. ''We sincerely hope that The Pizza Company will respect our innovations and compete fair and square.'' The firm said it was considering several steps if The Pizza Company did not comply. At the same time, the company is planning various marketing and communication campaigns to make customers more aware of brand differences. ''It is our commitment to appeal directly to the Thai consumers and urge them to 'Make it Smart and Make it Right', to stay with the Pizza Hut as we are the true global leader in innovation,'' Mr Han said. Executives of the Minor Food Group, the operator of The Pizza Company, declined to comment directly on the issue, saying only that the company would clarify its position soon. A Minor spokesperson said that competition in the pizza business worked both ways. ''There are times when we are conducting focus groups and market surveys on new products, only to see our rivals launch [products] just slightly ahead of us. That's the way it is.'' Pizza Hut may have a legal claim against The Pizza Company if trade secrets are deemed to have been violated, according to Thawat Damsa-ard, a litigator at the international law firm Tilleke & Gibbins. ''That's because it's almost impossible for one company to introduce a similar product a week or two after the innovator's launch without having known about it in the first place,'' he explained. However, he added, the claim could only go through if Pizza Hut could prove its secrecy had been compromised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted September 8, 2006 Report Share Posted September 8, 2006 My understanding is that this is the way Bill Heinecke operates. He takes others' ideas, copies them ... but often does them better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limbo Posted September 8, 2006 Report Share Posted September 8, 2006 IMHO, both companies suck big time. Whatever they serve sure ain't pizza in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samak Posted September 8, 2006 Report Share Posted September 8, 2006 that's actually no news at all, but a ongoing business conflict for a long time. Minor Group (owned by William Heinecke and NOT by thais) was the exclusive franchise holder for Pizza Hut in Thailand until a couple of years ago. Then they split up and Minor Group started with their own company, the Pizza Company (to save the franchise fees!). there were always some legal battles between the two but Heinecke, well connected in thailand always got away with it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Posted September 8, 2006 Report Share Posted September 8, 2006 It is obvious pizza company has no shame over copying everything. Their business model seems to be this: we'll keep our menu updated to have identical offerings as Pizza Hut, but we have lower operating costs than you. How can you compete with that? And reading the article it seems to be legal as long as the ideas weren't stolen before released. A lot of Pizza Company pizza's don't appeal to me, but I am not ashamed to say there are several that are teriffic. Be warned after trying the triple crust, there is no going back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted September 8, 2006 Report Share Posted September 8, 2006 I've been told that lots of companies won't do business with Heinecke any more. He will try to find out everything about your business - and then take your customers away from you. Heinecke's father was US Ambassador to Thailand once upon a time. Lots of important friends because of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillinNYC Posted September 8, 2006 Report Share Posted September 8, 2006 I realize that it is splitting hairs but Bill Heinecke became a Thai citizen in 1991. So in fact the company is Thai owned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted September 8, 2006 Report Share Posted September 8, 2006 Copying the same line of beverages such as Pepsi has to be a major infringement. I checked the bathrooms and they even use the same brand of toiletpaper! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickfarang Posted September 10, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 10, 2006 I guess their legal argument boils down to what is considered proprietary intellectual property and what isn't. Selection of toilet paper brand? The size of the bowls in the sald bar? etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.