- Cookies are serious business when you run a cookie business.
There’s a war raging in Utah. And it’s been fought over a bunch of cookies.
Three gourmet cookie companies have been engaged in a legal battle for almost a year. What started as a row over similar branding has expanded to involve recipes, lost profits, and generally hurt feelings.
The firms in the eye of the storm are Crumbl, Crave, and Dirty Dough. The former originally accused Crave and Dirty Dough of producing “confusingly similar” marketing materials, such as logos and websites.
Now, Dirty Dough (DD) has fired back. The company recently asked to file a counterclaim against Crumbl, claiming that the legal battle has caused DD undue financial harm.
But why would the three companies get into such a fight? Well, there might just be a good reason.
Crumbl claims that the founders of both Crave and DD used to be or applied to be employees at the company. Allegedly, they took Crumbl’s brand and recipes to set up a rival business.
But is that really true? Let’s check the story out in greater detail.
A Slew of Accusations
Crumbl filed its original lawsuit in May 2022. It laid similar, yet different, accusations against Crave and DD.
According to Crumbl, Crave’s founder Trent English applied to be a Crumbl franchisee back in 2019. He toured the company’s locations and allegedly made detailed notes of what he saw.
“The fact that Crave was founded by a former Crumbl applicant with knowledge of Crumbl’s business and brand identity shows that Crave was clearly aware of Crumbl and the Crumbl trade dress,” the company claims in its lawsuit, according to KSL.
For its part, Crave responded to the lawsuit by stating English never applied to be a Crumbl franchisee.
Similarly, Crumbl alleges that the DD founder, Bradley Maxwell, was a Crumbl process engineer for a few months in 2019. Through his position, he would’ve become familiar with the company’s recipes and other details.
In addition, Crumbl claims Maxwell’s brother Bennett applied to work at the company in 2019, but wasn’t hired. Soon after, the two brothers launched DD.
On top of recipes, Crumbl accuses both companies of stealing their brand identity. For instance, both Crave and DD use long boxes similar to Crumbl’s that fit a set number of cookies perfectly side by side.
The three companies’ websites and logos are also — according to Crumbl — so similar that they could confuse consumers. Finally, Crumbls claims is competitors have stolen its weekly rotating menu concept.
Comparing the Rivals
But is there any truth to Crumbl’s claims? We don’t live in Utah, so we can’t go check out the cookies — but we can look at the websites.
Let’s start with Crumbl. The home page features a zooming, rotating video of various cookies. The menu elements pop up on the left side of the page.
Now, we have to admit, DD’s website does look quite similar. There’s the same kind of video playing and the menu also comes out from the side — only, DD’s menu is on the right.
Crave’s website, on the other hand, doesn’t look similar at all. Sure, there’s a big cookie, but it’s a still image. Additionally, all the menu elements are on the top.
But what about the logos? Crumbl accuses the two other companies of stealing their logo idea of a cookie that has a bite taken out of it.
Here, we at least see a couple of issues. Crumbl’s current logo doesn’t have a cookie at all. Even its previous logo has incorporated the bitten cookie into a chef’s hat.
DD and Crave do have partially eaten cookies in their logos. But that seems like the go-to logo for any cookie company.
It’s not exactly the peak of creativity, now is it?
So, what’s our verdict on this? Well, we can kinda-sorta see the similarities, but they don’t seem that drastic to us.
Then again, we’re not intellectual property lawyers.
Lost Money
With Crumbl’s lawsuit still unsettled, DD has taken a shot back at its rival. Earlier this month, DD asked to file a counterclaim, requesting financial compensation from Crumbl for lost revenues.
The countersuit states that DD and Crumbl actually used to have a “business relationship,” according to KSL. However, that relationship “soured and ended” after the original lawsuit.
DD claims that Crumbl’s lawsuit is nothing but an attempt at stifling competition. The company states that the concepts of long cookie boxes or rotating menus are hardly unique.
DD also alleges that the lawsuit has caused the company financial harm, including lost investors, loan refusals, and legal fees. It’s asking that the courts allow DD to recover those costs from Crumbl.
That’s a bit of a strange claim, since in late 2022, DD’s Bennet Maxwell claimed the lawsuit had actually increased sales at the company. DD had also leaned into the court case with its marketing, using slogans such as “Cookies so good we’re being sued!” and “We don’t file lawsuits; we just have better cookies!”
But who knows — maybe the mounting legal fees are getting too expensive. We’ll have to see which way the cookie crumbles once the courts finally make their decision.
Hits: 0
