As this evolves, I’m less inclined to lean heavily on the pork industry and am putting the fault for this mess in the hands of the law firm that sent her that letter. A simple phone call to Jen would have settled this, especially when you consider she had no ill intent towards the pork industry.

She, like many of us who like parodies, funny word relationships, etc. probably just thought she was being clever or silly. We all might find ourselves believing so strongly in a cause that’s dear to us, that we would do anything to help it, or raise funds for it, as she does. I think the law firm is the bully here, more than the pork industry, but someone at the pork industry needs to know what that left foot is doing on their behalf

First they’d have to prove she violated their trademark. I really doubt she has, but I can’t say so with certainty because trademarks were not one of the areas I’ve worked on. Nevertheless the elements that are needed to demonstrate that a trademark violation occurred along with the elements needed to demonstrate that she is liable or not should be easy enough for most any lawyer to determine and answer for her. But in any case where an infringement of patent, copyright, trademark etc. has been alleged, the really important thing is the damages. The pork industry would have to demonstrate that her attempts to promote breast-feeding damaged the industry and not only that, they must specify the damages and demonstrate the reasoning behind the amounts. I know. I used to get paid a lot of money to calculate these damage allegations and then get cross-examined on each minute detail of my calculation. On this aspect, the Pork Industry is so far out to lunch it is inconceivable that they would risk a trial on it. But if they did, I would love to watch them make public fools of themselves while judge and jury laughed them out of court. She really should not lose any sleep over this. The person that should lose sleep is the intern/staffer who tried to make a name for him/herself with the powers that be over this. (That is a guess on my part, based on my experience with who generally makes fool errors like this.)

It is pretty a wild association to connect milk with pork, ya know.

(Okay: if 7-Up could get away with the “uncola” …)

At any rate, trademarks also have to do with the product being sold and whether the trademark might confuse consumers into believing that her product (a t-shirt about breastfeeding) is theirs (pork). I haven’t stated it well, but that’s the general idea — and these lawyers know it.