Serious Eats - seriouseats.com

I think her point is that the actions of her ex-employees directly attack her bottom line.

Having an employee open a new restaurant? Totally ok.

Having an employee open a copycat restaurant in, say, Washington D.C.? A little annoying, but hey, that's entrepreneurship.

Heck, if Ed had opened his restaurant on the UES instead, or in Park Slope, maybe even then it'd be a different matter.

Fact is, he took her entire concept: the types of dishes served + the general atmosphere + little bitty details like the same types of chairs and bartop, then opened a restaurant near enough to directly pull business away from Pearl.

Yes, other people use marble-topped bars. Yes, other people serve lobster rolls. Yes, other people have straw-backed chairs and whatnot. (and so on for all sorts of decor and food details) But how many of those people have all those things, in combination, in one restaurant, in NYC, within spitting distance of Pearl?

Is it really only one hour? The page with all the classes listed says 1:30 to 2:30, but the booking system shows it as 1:30PM to 3:30 PM.

Holy crow, that recipe looks totally awesome. If I weren't busy all weekend, I'd totally make this for Sunday brunch.

As it is, I'll be having people over next Sunday, and you can bet they'll be eating some maple sage sausage.

I don't know much about legal matters, so I believe others when they say this case has no legal merit, but I am confused by people who compare this situation to one where you have restaurants with similar concepts in different cities that are 100's or thousands of miles apart. These places are a mile apart and almost look they could be part of the same chain.

I think I will never go to Pearl Oyster Bar again. I guess until POB opened there wasn't such a thing as a new england seafood shack otherwise some one would be suing her. She really needs to get over herself. Does she really think two more "lobster shacks" are going to hurt her bottom line? She gets plenty of business.

Intellectual Property? I am not a lawyer, but I am an assiduous observer of the evolving definitions of intellectual property.

Is Rebecca Charles arguing that her recipes are a trade secret?

She admits that there is no novelty in the concept behind her restaurant or the cuisine she offers to her guests. To use patent law parlance, there is prior art and, consequently, no enforceable rights in the alleged intellectual property.

I hope that she does not intend to argue that anyone will confuse Pearl Oyster Bar and Ed's Lobster Bar and that this confusion will diminish the value of her recipes, concept, and guest service.

Ms. Charles is not operating a chain and has dubious claims to unregisterd trademark infringement. Ms. Charles would have to allege that Ed McFarland's business is "passing off" i.e. Ed's Lobster Bar is misrepresenting itself and illicitly appropriating the reputation and doing damage to the hard won business goodwill of Pearl Oyster Bar. Trademark is notoriously one of the most difficult forms of intellectual property to defend because of the diligent and often costly defense it requires to preserve.

Restaurants distinguish themselves in the marketplace in a variety of ways, but food quality and service are irreplaceable elements of success in the industry.

To me, Ms. Charles' lawsuit appears to be anti-competitive. It is not unusual in the market for leased restaurant space for exclusivity clauses to appear in the lease contract that prohibit landlords from renting to a competitor selling similar products i.e. a sandwich shop may require a contingency in the lease agreement forbidding the landlord from leasing to another sandwich shop within the same building or a clearly defined trade area.

If Ms. Charles wants to squander the good will she has worked hard to build up in her business venture, she should pursue this case that will surely attract the attention of her guests and her competitors in ways she may eventually regret.

If Ms. Charles wants to enjoy continued success in an increasingly competitive submarket of the restaurant industry in New York City she should continue to offer the same delightful food, service, and atmosphere that her many satisfied and loyal guests value and recommend to others.

Ooops, the Miami Beach restaurant is NEXX.

The lawsuit is a joke. She did not copyright her food, and lets be honest, lobster rolls, Caesar salads and raw seafood are nothing new. Even if he used her recipes I don't think she has a case. Has she done a chemical analysis on the Caesar dressing to determine if he is using the exact same ingredients (in the same quantities) and preperation method?

If she wants to protect herself, make all employees sign non-compete agreements or non-disclosure agreements, something you think she might have done after the first clone opened up a few years back.

Look it sucks that this guy is ripping her off, (it reminds me of the Mac Dowell's restruant in Coming to America) but if this lawsuit is successfull watch out because you will see a flurry of lawsuits. Maybe White Castle will sue Krystal for making similar small steamed hamburgers or the Anchor Bar will sue the tens of thousands of places serving buffalo wings.