Fishy duo open copy of Ocean Basket in US
A SOUTH African and her Egyptian husband have been accused of launching restaurants in the US that blatantly copy the branding of Ocean Basket and other successful home-grown eateries.
The couple have allegedly ripped off Ocean Basket, which said this week that its legal team was investigating a case of “stolen identity”, as well as Mugg & Bean.
Ben Filmalter, who with his wife, Judi, launched the Mugg & Bean brand, opened the first outlet in Cape Town in 1996, drawing on inspiration from US coffee shops.
The Mugg & Bean trademark, which is protected by federal law, is registered in the US, because the company intends to launch the brand there. In South Africa, Mugg & Bean is owned by Famous Brands, which bought the rights to trade the name in South Africa and Africa for R104-million in 2009.
“We became aware of these ‘cowboys’ using many successful South African brands on their website. We did alert some of the brand owners in South Africa,” Filmalter said this week.
The couple, identified as Maurice and Gadija Ghaniem, run MG Food Services, a subsidiary of their group, MJ International Travel Holdings, of which Gadija is the president and CEO.
Mystery surrounds the Ghaniems, who now live in California. They could not be contacted through telephone numbers and an email addresses on the various websites linked to their businesses. In May last year, the Visalia Times-Delta newspaper in California published a story on the Ghaniems’ launch of a trio of restaurants: Ocean Basket, Flame Grilled Jay’s Peri Peri Chicken and The Coffee Lounge M&B.
According to the Visalia Times-Delta interview, Maurice met Gadija in Johannesburg after he came to South Africa to further his studies. They married in 1990, established a business, had four children and emigrated to the US about two years ago.
The Coffee Lounge, which was first launched as Mugs & Bean, changed its name after Filmalter’s attorneys in New York issued a “cease and desist” order. But it seems the Ghaniems did not change the menu design, which still resembles the South African Mugg & Bean menu, according to Filmalter.
Filmalter, who operates other restaurants in the US, said: “One of our food suppliers alerted us to this individual — who is so low on experience — [he] was asking Sysco to advise them on ingredients, clearly passing themselves off as the new owners of the brand.”
The executive from Sysco told Filmalter that the person had a South African connection and spoke with a “broad phoney American accent” .
“At this time the [Ghaniems’] website was listing Mugg & Bean complete with correct font and star,” he added. “Sadly,
CATCHY CONCEPT: The Ocean Basket outlet at The Zone in Rosebank, Johannesburg [the] South African IP [intellectual property] is at risk even in the US and protection can be very costly,” said Filmalter.
This may be why Ocean Basket’s first line of attack against the copycats is a public relations campaign using the US press and the internet.
Grace Harding, the company leader of Ocean Basket, said: “If we are forced into a legal route we will consider those avenues, but are avoiding that for now.”
Ocean Basket founders Fats Lazarides and his brother George opened the first restaurant in Pretoria in 1995. Today the business has more than 100 outlets and is trading in 12 countries. The name has been trademarked in Europe, Australia, China, India and countries in the Middle East.
Harding said Ocean Basket had been able to prevent harm to the brand in previous copycat cases in Thailand, Cyprus, Greece and Australia because it had acted promptly. The latest case came to her attention “in the last few days”.
Ocean Basket used to be trademarked in the US, and the trademark has to be renewed every two years. It was up for renewal this year but the firm failed to reapply.
Mandy Gordon, a partner at intellectual property law specialists Adams & Adams, said litigation overseas could cost “several hundreds of thousands of rands” and would be best done through a US-based firm.
But there are difficulties. “As trademarks are territorial, one would need to prove rights in the US,” said Gordon, adding that trademark owners could launch actions for infringement and trademark dilution.