Originally Posted by
tadawdy
The issue isn't kale. It's a company claiming that someone is taking advantage of their branding by using a version of their (possibly trademarked or copyrighted or whatever the appropriate legal jargon is here) slogan. To me, the slogan isn't original enough to escape the confines of everyday speech and writing, and I wouldn't like to see it have broad protection. That's just my sentiment, though.
The thing about lawsuits is that the require the defendant to go through a considerable amount of fuss and bother. Most people will back off and give up rather than fight partially because they can not afford a long, expensive litigation. Unless the defendant were using a VERY similar visual look in their phrase, one would think that the defendant would prevail. Given the fact that doing this makes the company look petty, it makes the litigation look like poor judgement.