Subway v. Quiznos (Letters)

NOTE: The information and commentary contained in this database entry are based on court filings and other informational sources that may contain unproven allegations made by the parties. The truthfulness and accuracy of such information is likely to be in dispute. Information contained in this entry is current as of the last event mentioned in the "Description" section below; additional proceedings might have taken place in this matter since this event.

Summary

Threat Type: 

Correspondence

Date: 

11/01/2006

Status: 

Concluded

Location: 

California

Disposition: 

Lawsuit Filed

Verdict or Settlement Amount: 

N/A
In late 2006, restaurant franchisor Quiznos and video-sharing site iFilm co-sponsored a nationwide contest, “Quiznos v. Subway TV Ad Challenge,” inviting members of the public to submit videos comparing a Quiznos sandwich to a Subway sandwich using the theme "meat, no meat." Contestants submitted their videos... read full description
Parties

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

QIP Holders LLC (Quiznos); iFilm Corp.

Type of Party: 

Large Organization

Type of Party: 

Organization
Large Organization

Location of Party: 

  • Florida
  • Connecticut

Location of Party: 

  • California
  • Colorado
  • Delaware
Description

In late 2006, restaurant franchisor Quiznos and video-sharing site iFilm co-sponsored a nationwide contest, “Quiznos v. Subway TV Ad Challenge,” inviting members of the public to submit videos comparing a Quiznos sandwich to a Subway sandwich using the theme "meat, no meat." Contestants submitted their videos to www.meatnomeat.com, and iFilm published entries on its website, where they remained following the end of the contest and selection of the winner.

According to paragraph 23 of Subway's second amended complaint, later filed in federal court in Connecticut, on November 1, 2006 Subway sent Quiznos and/or iFilm cease-and-desist letters, demanding that they stop making "false and misleading derogatory statements" about Subway's product via the user-submitted videos, and that they "remove from [their] websites the commercials and advertisements." Two of the commercial were apparently relocated, but, according to Subway's second amended complaint, Quiznos and iFilm refused to remove the commercials, which remained viewable online.

Subway filed a lawsuit against Quiznos and iFilm in federal court within days of the letters being sent. (Please see the CMLP's Database entry for the related Subway v. Quiznos lawsuit.)

Details

Content Type: 

  • Video

Publication Medium: 

Website

Subject Area: 

  • Third-Party Content
  • Advertising
Court Information & Documents

Jurisdiction: 

  • California

Source of Law: 

  • United States

Relevant Documents: 

CMLP Information (Private)

CMLP Notes: 

Jill Button edited -- not sure what 'subject area' if any is appropriate given that the CDA 230 defense has not been raised at the letter stage.