May 24, 2012

Lawsuit Regarding Strip Club Ad Highlights Importance Of Franchise Brand Management

A recent lawsuit filed by sandwich franchisor Capriotti’s underlines the importance of brand management for franchise companies. The franchisor sued its Las Vegas-based franchisee, seeking to terminate the franchise agreement and an injunction to prevent the franchisee from continuing to operate under the Capriotti’s name.

The franchisee is accused of engaging in an advertising campaign featuring the tagline "a match made in Vegas heaven: boobs and Bobbies." The allegation by Capriotti’s is that the franchise owner collaborated with the Las Vegas strip club Crazy Horse III to offer the Capriotti’s trademark turkey, stuffing, and cranberry sauce sandwich, the "Bobbie," during happy hour at the strip club. The problem with the attention-grabbing campaign, Capriotti’s claims, is that the franchisee never received permission from the company to run the advertisement. If the allegation is true, this very well could provide sufficient justification for termination of the franchise agreement.

Every well-drafted franchise agreement will have certain restrictions regarding the franchisee's ability to advertise. The franchisee will ordinarily be permitted to use any advertisements created by the franchisor's marketing department without obtaining advance permission. If the franchisee creates its own advertisements, however, the franchisor's written permission must first be obtained. Many franchise agreements will have a specific procedure for obtaining this written consent, including a time limitation for the franchise company to grant or deny permission to use the ad. Presumably, this is the provision that the Capriotti's franchisee has been accused of violating by failing to obtain the required approval.

The action by Capriotti's is understandable from a brand management point of view. The purpose of franchise agreement provisions that place limitations on a franchisee's ability to advertise is to protect brand integrity. If a franchisee is given carte blanche to use the franchise company's trademarks in any way that the franchisee sees fit, the overall brand image can be harmed if the franchisee is injudicious in the marks' use. In the Capriotti's example, the "boobs and Bobbies" ad could hurt the brand in the eyes of the public, which may not want to patronize a sandwich shop that associates with a strip club. Which is exactly Capriotti's point, as it contends in the lawsuit that the teaming up of the Capriotti's brand with an adult entertainment business will hurt the family-friendly reputation of the business.

The Capriotti's lawsuit provides important reminders for both franchisees and franchisors. For franchisees, the legal case underscores the absolute importance of obtaining franchisor permission and consent before using any marketing material that has not been created by the company's marketing department. For franchisors, the lawsuit is a reminder that it is critical for the franchise agreement to have appropriate controls for franchisee-created advertising, as well as strong remedies to address a franchisee's violation of those restrictions.

© Copyright 2012 Armstrong Teasdale LLP. All rights reserved

About the Author

Partner

Matt Kreutzer serves as Chair of the firm's Franchise, Distribution and Antitrust practice group and is a Certified Specialist in Franchise and Distribution Law by the California State Bar's Board of Legal Specialization. He has spent more than a decade working with individuals and companies on issues relating to franchise law and is well-versed in all stages of the franchise relationship. 

702-678-5070

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.