Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Inside the Taco Bell Case

By Daniel P. Ettinger
September 01, 2003

Competition in all aspects of the entertainment world – from television to movies, to the record industry, to the Internet, to the video game industry – has grown quite fierce over the past decade. The stakes are higher than ever. So is the demand for successful, breakthrough ideas. Consequently, cases alleging the theft of creative ideas are becoming more and more common. A recent case in which this writer served as plaintiffs' co-counsel demonstrates how substantial damages can be in lawsuits over ideas.

In June, after a three-week trial, a federal jury in Grand Rapids, MI, awarded plaintiffs Joseph Shields, Thomas Rinks and their company, Wrench LLC, $30.1 million against Taco Bell for breach of an implied-in-fact contract. Wrench LLC v. Taco Bell Corp., 1:98 CV 45. (Taco Bell is expected to appeal the case.) The plaintiffs claimed that Taco Bell used their ideas for a live-action Chihuahua with a feisty attitude and an obsession with Taco Bell food in a TV advertising campaign for 2.5 years without payment.

The plaintiffs came up with the idea for a character called Psycho Chihuahua in 1995. They licensed the character for such merchandise as t-shirts, posters and school supplies. In June 1996, Ed Alfaro, who was in charge of Taco Bell's licensing program, saw Psycho Chihuahua at the Licensing Expo in New York City.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.