"Hershey does not object to the content of defendant's book, or to the mere use of the word 'Hershey' in the title of the book," according to the lawsuit that was made public Monday. "However, defendant has designed and adopted a dust jacket for the book which extensively uses Hershey's well-known marks and trade dress beyond any manner permissible under law."
Attorneys for Simon & Schuster, the book's publisher, fired back, insisting that
...the Hershey symbols on the cover are "artistically relevant" to the book's subject and not expressly misleading.
"Trademark laws are designed to protect the public from likelihood of confusion, not to protect the monopolistic goals of a company that for whatever reason appears not to like the fact that a book has been published about its founder without its imprimatur," the publisher said.
This bit from Publisher's Lunch made me grin:
Publisher David Rosenthal says in a statement, "The book's jacket in no way infringes on Hershey trademarks. No one will confuse it with a candy bar and attempt to bite it or melt it..."
Perhaps that's true, Dave, but you missed a chance to instantly quash the other side's objections by pointing out that a book that looks like a big Hershey's bar is certain to make people buy Hershey's bars. Think about it: You're sitting on a bus and the guy across the aisle from you is reading this book, holding it in a way that makes the cover clearly visible to you. If you're at all like 99% of the women and quite a few of the men that I know, you'll leap off the bus, probably even before it stops moving, and make a mad dash to the nearest candy counter.
Ladies, am I right?