The iconic Big Mac has suffered a setback in a surprising legal battle. The European Union’s General Court has ruled that McDonald’s cannot hold the “Big Mac” trademark for chicken products. This decision, a victory for Irish fast-food chain Supermac, throws a wrench into McDonald’s trademark protections within the EU.

The dispute originated in 2017 when Supermac, known for its burgers and fish and chips, challenged McDonald’s trademark on “Big Mac” for meat and poultry products. Supermac argued that McDonald’s had yet to actively use the Big Mac name for chicken sandwiches in the EU, limiting its ability to expand its menu. The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) initially sided with McDonald’s, upholding its trademark for both meat and chicken.

However, Supermac pressed on, appealing the decision to the General Court. This time, the court ruled in their favor, stating that McDonald’s “had not proved genuine use” of the Big Mac trademark for chicken products within a continuous five-year period in the EU. The court argued that this lack of consistent use weakened McDonald’s claim to the trademark for chicken sandwiches.

The ruling is a significant win for Supermac, a testament to the power of perseverance and the triumph of the underdog. Pat McDonagh, CEO of Supermac’s, hailed it as a “vindication of small businesses everywhere that stand up to powerful global entities.” This legal victory could pave the way for Supermac to expand its menu in Europe, potentially including chicken sandwiches with names that evoke the Big Mac.

• Read more: Ticketmaster Confirms Massive Data Breach, Millions of Users’ Information Potentially Exposed

The impact on McDonald’s is less dramatic. The ruling only affects their trademark for chicken products, leaving the “Big Mac” name secure for their signature beef burger. McDonald’s can still sell chicken sandwiches in the EU, just not under the Big Mac moniker. They may invent a new name or use a generic descriptor like “chicken burger.”

The court decision also serves as a stark reminder of the importance of actively using trademarks. It’s a crucial lesson for all businesses, big or small, that they must demonstrate consistent use of their trademarks across the EU to maintain legal protection. This case serves as a reminder that even for established brands like McDonald’s, neglecting a trademark in specific product categories can lead to legal challenges, a fact that all businesses should be aware of.

McDonald’s could also appeal the decision to the Court of Justice of the European Union, the bloc’s highest court. If they choose this route, the legal battle over the Big Mac trademark could continue for some time.

While the immediate impact is limited to the use of the name “Big Mac” for chicken products, the court’s decision has wider implications. It not only reinforces the rights of smaller businesses to challenge the trademarks of larger corporations, particularly when those trademarks haven’t been actively used, but also opens the door to a more diverse and competitive European fast-food market. This could lead to a more competitive landscape in the European fast-food market, with increased options for consumers, a potential boon for those seeking variety in their dining choices.

One thing’s for sure: the Big Mac, though unchallenged for its beefy throne, has lost some of its trademark clout in the EU. Whether this is a “Mac” attack on McDonald’s dominance or simply a course correction in trademark law remains to be seen.