Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Friday, August 28, 2009

KFC

Posted by on Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 2:00 PM

There used to be a KFC next door to The Stranger offices, but they vacated the building and it sat empty until the most magical tenant appeared: Rancho Bravo, purveyor of fine Mexican flavors. The new owners kept the old decor and changed the cuisine. We thought it was the best thing since spiced beans. But, in retrospect, it's nothing compared to what folks did to an abandoned KFC in LA:

kfc_la_weekly_noah_galuten.jpg

Photo by Noah Galuten in the LA Weekly blog.

There have been marijuana dispensaries popping up all over Southern California of late, but this one is slightly different. Rather than tearing the whole thing down and starting from scratch, the proprietors of this alternative KFC decided to incorporate the design of the previous tenants. They have removed the official Kentucky Fried Chicken logo, but the rest of the building remains mostly intact.

They call it "Kind For Cures."

 

Comments (23) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
balderdash 1
I wish a marijuana dispensary would open up in Ballard.

Oh man, they could have used the old Denny's! That would have been perfect! Two birds: one stone(d). Ha.
Posted by balderdash http://introverse.blogspot.com on August 28, 2009 at 2:14 PM
michael strangeways 2
uh, KFC will still sue their ass for obviously aping the design elements of KFC.
Posted by michael strangeways http://www.seattlegayscene.com/ on August 28, 2009 at 2:19 PM
lizzie 3
Dominic, I'd love an article or blog post about why California dispensaries are so numerous, open, and legit while ours are few, secretive, and covert. I don't understand it.
Posted by lizzie on August 28, 2009 at 2:21 PM
vooodooo84 4
@ architecture is copyrightable, but you cannot take action against the owners of the building, since the purchased it legally.

All KFC can do is come after them for using the trademark of KFC. They have no rights over a building design that they disposed of and someone else owns.
Posted by vooodooo84 on August 28, 2009 at 2:24 PM
Allyn 5
They need landscaping help.
Posted by Allyn on August 28, 2009 at 2:27 PM
Dominic Holden 6
@ 3) The very short answer is that California's medical marijuana law allows dispensaries to operate. They can be busted federally, but that is rare, and even rarer under the Obama administration. So they proliferate. But Washington's medical marijuana law, which lacks even arrest protection for authorized patients, makes no accommodation for dispensaries or even cooperative cultivation. In other words, the California law protects patients and allows for access, and ours--until the state legislature gives it some muscle--is a gesture.
Posted by Dominic Holden on August 28, 2009 at 2:28 PM
7
Another great use of an old KFC building is Spork restaurant in San Francisco. http://lifewithoutbuildings.net/2008/01
/the-once-and-future-kfcs.html
Posted by bob2 on August 28, 2009 at 2:40 PM
w7ngman 8
#4 they might be able to enforce a claim on their branding, notably the red/white striped pointy top thing.
Posted by w7ngman http://userscripts.org/users/89370 on August 28, 2009 at 2:41 PM
lizzie 9
Great answer -- thanks Dominic!
Posted by lizzie on August 28, 2009 at 2:42 PM
10
HA... my friend just moved out of the building right behind the 'KFC' in the picture. Bet you the rent would have skyrocketed after that place opens.
Posted by Travis on August 28, 2009 at 2:50 PM
vooodooo84 11
@8 Again, copyright law over architectural elements gives basically absolute protection for owners of an authorized reproduction. And since this was originally a work constructed by the owner of the architectural copyright, there is no copyright violation because there was no copying involved in this building.

If the red and white stripy design is trademarked, that is another issue, but again, KFC sold the building so its hard for them to argue that someone misappropriated any of their property.
Posted by vooodooo84 on August 28, 2009 at 3:06 PM
michael strangeways 12
They're using "KFC" to advertise their business and using KFC design elements and apparently making an effort to appear like they are a KFC, just one that sells pot instead of greasy chicken...all grounds for a potentially successful lawsuit, or at the very least, a sternly worded cease and desist notice with a lot of not so subtle threats of litigation.
Posted by michael strangeways http://www.seattlegayscene.com/ on August 28, 2009 at 3:13 PM
Will in Seattle 13
So is this a Stealth KFC or a Stealth MJ store?

Red and white stripey designs existed in Italy at restaurants for centuries - so patenting that is laughable.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on August 28, 2009 at 3:14 PM
Allyn 14
@12 "just one that sells pot instead of greasy chicken..."

If the original KFC had but opened this outlet (or sublet some space) themselves, they may not have gone out of business in the first place, it seems. Just thinking...
Posted by Allyn on August 28, 2009 at 3:16 PM
Will in Seattle 15
@12 - but obviously they're not competing in the same line of business.

I can restrict a trademark in one line of business (food sales) but not in an unrelated business (which actually increases food sales, especially KFC).

Also, California has strong DBA rules that permit multiple vendors to share names for non-chain stores - so that John Doe and Mary Jane Doe might be Doing Business As KFC Green Supplies, licenses as KFC Green Supplies 2006 Limited, and exempt.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on August 28, 2009 at 3:18 PM
pissy mcslogbot 16
IMO Kind For Cures is sort of meh,
I think that Krunk For Crackers has more impact.
Posted by pissy mcslogbot on August 28, 2009 at 3:41 PM
meowmeowkitty 17
I bought medical weed for the first time today at a local club. It was so civilized.

I am so baked.
Posted by meowmeowkitty on August 28, 2009 at 4:25 PM
Will in Seattle 18
ooh, I like your idea, pms @16.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on August 28, 2009 at 5:06 PM
vooodooo84 19
@15 You are totally wrong as usual. Trademarks can be legally infringed regardless of the "line of business" that the infringer is conducting themselves.
Posted by vooodooo84 on August 28, 2009 at 7:08 PM
20
I like Krazy Fucking Cannabis.
Posted by Luke on August 28, 2009 at 7:56 PM
21
Rancho Bravo is better than any 'kind' of weed ipso facto, because weed's most significant tendency is to flatten all distinctions. The best weed ever would by its very nature limit its own access to excellence (and yours, dear smoker). And Rancho Bravo is deliriously good, and sincerely Mexican, and in the dead center of the Hill.
Posted by Zioncheck on August 29, 2009 at 1:44 AM
Will in Seattle 22
@19 - well, sure, if you are like Microserf and have thousands of attack lawyers you can pile on cases ... anything can be sued.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on August 30, 2009 at 5:41 AM
NumberOne 23
I thought it stood for "Killer Fuckin' Chron"
Posted by NumberOne on August 30, 2009 at 8:12 AM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy