John Rizvi

John Rizvi

By Real News Public RelationsBusiness
Download on the App Store

John Rizvi episodes

  • Lawsuit claims Buffalo Wild Wings misled customers with boneless wings | iHeart's WIOD Radio Miami | 3/23/23
    iHeart's Talk Radio WIOD recently asked John Rizvi, The Patent Professor to come on the air 🎙 in Miami, FL to discuss a class action lawsuit against Buffalo Wild Wings. Mr. Rizvi described the lawsuit, in which the plaintiffs claim the restaurant is selling falsely advertised boneless wings because they are actually breast meat, not wing meat.

    The lawsuit claims that the restaurant is profiting by calling them boneless chicken wings, but they are essentially just chicken nuggets dipped in sauce. Mr. Rizvi said it would come down to whether the consumer of average intelligence, education, and knowledge believes that boneless chicken wings are not wing meat. The reality is that most consumers know that boneless chicken wings are not made from wing meat. Therefore, this case is unlikely to go anywhere. Mr. Rizvi noted that the court of public opinion is on the side of the restaurant chain because most consumers view this as a frivolous lawsuit. Nonetheless, Buffalo Wild Wings tweeted a somewhat risky message, admitting that the boneless wings are made from chicken breasts. From a PR standpoint, it comes across as really arrogant and cocky, as if the plaintiff has no case as if it's a frivolous lawsuit. Nonetheless, the tweet confirms that the boneless wings are made from chicken breasts and not wing meat.

    The interviewer noted that the PR person who put out the tweet either lawyered it up or took a significant risk. Mr. Rizvi would not want to be the plaintiff's lawyer in this case.

    ✔ 610 WIOD Social Media
    ➤ https://wiod.iheart.com
    ➤ https://facebook.com/610wiod
    5 min
  • Supreme Court to weigh in on Jack Daniel's dog toy trademark battle | iHeart's Talk Radio WLW Cincinnati | 3/15/23
    iHeart's WLW Radio recently asked John Rizvi to come on the air 🎙 in Cincinnati, OH to discuss an upcoming Supreme Court case that has everyone talking. Jack Daniels has taken a dog toy company to court, claiming they make their dog toy look too much like a Jack Daniels bottle in violation of their trademark rights. The maker of the dog toy claims that it is expressive speech and is unfairly being categorized as an infringement on a parody. Essentially, it's a joke. The reason it's gotten all the way to the Supreme Court is that there's a need for guidance as to where the Commerce clause stops, and the First Amendment rights start.

    John Rizvi, the patent professor, explains that the Supreme Court will have to draw the line between First Amendment rights to free speech and trademark law. Essentially, it’s a balancing act that has to be done before the Court. This case is essentially a commercial product for profit and not somebody doing a free speech in the traditional sense. The constitutional right to free speech doesn't allow someone to go into a theater and yell fire. There are restrictions on free speech, and the court will have to determine whether Trademark Rights and Lanham Act will kick in and prevent the parity of trademarks and how much.

    Jack Daniels has a duty to enforce and protect their marks and trademarks, and if they don’t do that, its rights become diluted. There is also a risk to other trademark holders that could be affected if Jack Daniels wins the case. Of course, consumer confusion is one of the things that the Supreme Court judges will be more concerned about. In conclusion, it's a strange case on all fronts, but an important case because it's really going to determine the rights of trademark owners going forward, and how strong protection they can get and stopping parodies versus how much leeway being funny is going to allow commercial products.

    ✔ 700 WLW Social Media
    ➤ https://700wlw.iheart.com
    ➤ https://facebook.com/700wlw
    13 min