Here’s some trivia relating to the popularised “Walmart smiley face”:
French journalist Franklin Loufrani registered the iconic smiley face image as a trademark in France in 1971 , and he created “The Smiley Licensing Corporation, Ltd.” to sell, license, and advertise the smiley face image in the United Kingdom and Europe. In 2001 the name of Loufrani’s company was changed to SmileyWorld, which has managed to register the symbol in over 100 countries (not including the USA) for 25 classes of goods and services. [Wikipedia]
Enter Walmart:
In 1997, Franklin Loufrani and Smiley World attempted to acquire trademark rights to the symbol (and even to the word “smiley” itself) in the United States. This brought Loufrani into conflict with Wal-Mart, which had begun prominently featuring a happy face in its “Rolling Back Prices” campaign over a year earlier. Wal-Mart responded first by trying to block Loufrani’s application, then later by trying to register the smiley face themselves; Loufrani in turn sued to stop Wal-Mart’s application, and in 2002 the issue went to court, where it would languish for seven years before a decision.
So, what happened? Well, the court eventually ruled that, in the United States, a “smiley face” is public domain and can not be trademarked by anyone.
Not that it changes COSATU’s opinion of Walmart’s multi-billion-dollar entrance into South Africa, mind you.
South Africa is already suffering badly from the effects of massive companies that destroy small business (Vodacom, for example) and Walmart will be worse – make no mistake; they will damage small businesses in South Africa and we will go back to the days of the old regime when the company was basically run by a handful of companies all owned by broeders; however, South Africa is already going down that road, anyway – just look at the Secrecy Bill; that’s got Hendrik Verwoerd, BJ Vorster and PW written all over it.
On the other hand, there’s absolutely no work and people are actually starving; so what to do? Let people starve but stick to our principles (sort of like the African countries that deny people food because they don’t really understand genetic modification) or allow them to work for the big boss, Walmart?
Typo – sorry, that’s what happens when you get all irritable and type quickly. It should read:
“days of the old regime when the COUNTRY was basically run by a handful of companies
> South Africa is already suffering badly from the effects of massive companies that destroy small business (Vodacom, for example) and Walmart will be worse
How has Vodacom been “destroyed”? They’re certainly no “small business”, for one. And Vodafone’s share is only marginally over half, for two. That’s hardly destructive.
> they will damage small businesses in South Africa
The same was said about McDonald’s when they entered South Africa; destroying small (food) businesses, that is. I’d like to see evidence of this widespread destruction that you cite.
Agreed with Jerm here. Walmart is a good thing, they create competition, the SA competition commission won’t allow them to destroy SA.
@ Jerm, it’s a little too complex to go into properly here but I’m happy to chat to you. In short, they’re blocking incoming international calls unless these calls go through them and only them and so they not only control price but also whom they choose to deal with ….
From a legal perspective it’s anti competitive but all the lines belong to them anyway so what does anyone do? We have no real competition in SA when it comes to telecoms because Vodacom/Telkom still own the lot; it’s really quite serious … it’s something I’m living because it’s happening to a member of my family so I’m not dreaming it up.
McDonalds were never competition in the food industry to begin with (they make their money from properties, anyway) ….. for starters, it was never a vital business and secondly, their burgers suck. South Africans are fussy eaters and it’s impossible to make a killing from dishing up cardboard on a bun to the average South African. Telecoms are a vital business.
I think Cosatu is miffed because of the danger to the already beleaguered clothing industry which requires very little ] to crack at this stage; (bear in mind they’re really struggling with imports, especially from the east, and whilst I agree with everyone that we’ve got the whole costing thing wrong in this industry and that productivity sucks, we need also put the whole thing in context ..
PS
The former CFO of McDonald’s CFO, Harry J. Sonneborn is often quoted as having said” “We are not basically in the food business. We are in the real estate business. The only reason we sell hamburgers is because they are the greatest producer of revenue from which our tenants can pay us rent.”
> In short, they’re blocking incoming international calls unless these calls go through them and only them and so they not only control price but also whom they choose to deal with ….
From a legal perspective it’s anti competitive but all the lines belong to them anyway so what does anyone do?
How will this “destroy” small businesses?
> We have no real competition in SA when it comes to telecoms because Vodacom/Telkom still own the lot
In your first comment, you said “South Africa is already suffering badly from the effects of massive companies that destroy small business (Vodacom, for example)”. If we have “no real competition” in telecoms, then how has Vodacom (mostly privately owned) handicapped small business?
> McDonalds were never competition in the food industry to begin with (they make their money from properties, anyway)
That’s easy to say after the fact. When they entered SA, there was a lot of opposition (much the same as we’re seeing with Walmart). The unions were just as upset as they are now. (Equally upset were Steers etc.) McDonald’s is the world’s largest hamburger fast food chain, despite their property interests.
Something to remember is that we have choice. If the service and products at Walmart are superior, then consumers (who now have strong protection) will continue shopping there. If they’re just another McDonald’s, then consumers will continue shopping at Checkers and so on. Or both.
No one will force South Africans to shop at Walmart and I’m yet to see evidence of how Walmart will “destroy” the local market.
@jacoba: your comments are a bit over the top. The Competition Commission allowed in Walmart with conditions. Consumers are very well protected and Walmart are unlikely to monopolize our market. On top of that that they only have 51% of MassMart, not enough to cause serious harm.
@ Saville – I have no problem with Walmart, actually. Nor did I have a problem with Macdonalds. I do have a problem with Vodacom.
@ Jerm – I said I’d chat to you privately; this is a public forum & I’m mindful of it.
Deal. But only you’re baking. I’ve heard, via the grapevine, that you make a mean anything.
@Jacoba
FAIL. Sorry but your “let’s speak in private” comments don’t work. Why must you bring your evidence behind closed doors? Do you even have evidence?…