I was modifying my original post when it said that it had timed out. This is what I intended to say.


Once again, we seem to be talking passed each other instead of to each other. In no sense of the word was I "claiming you were promulgating an urban myth", that is something I would NEVER do. I was merely reporting what I had found in my researches; that it's considered an urban legend. Do what I did; Take a look at Wikepedia (Please no "Wikipedia is junkthey've cleaned up their act tremendously from what I can see.) [en.wikipedia.org]. Wikipedia cited snopes in their reference so I went to Snopes and noticed that they didn't cite any laws or lawsuits to support their assertion. I did more google search on KFC royalty rights and variations and just came up with the usual corporate cat fight law suits over-who-owed-who-how-much-for-royalty-fees. As you can see Snopes or Wikipedia are hardly the definitive statement on the matter. In my opinion the matter hasn't been settled. Since there's no definitive answer to this question so far, I'm going to write a letter to KFC and try and get some resolution to this question once and for all. On the other hand since you clearly know how to do legal searches perhaps you can do a search for it.

When I read your original comment I was so astonished at it that I scoured the Kentucky state home page looking for information on obtaining licensing rights for using the word "Kentucky". I found nothing. Then I went to Wikipedia where it said that the trademark dispute along with Col. Sanders using biogenetic mutant chickens were both urban legends and THAT WAS BEFORE I POSTED MY RESPONSE TO YOU. Yes I do try to get my facts straight but iirc as the saying goes "Even Homer nodded.". Posting on a board, I might do a google search and glance through one or two reference books and leave it at that. After all we're just kicking ideas around here; nobody's going to win the Nobel prize here. However, in my own personal research it's exhaustive and expensive. For instance I've been doing research for a novel that I'm writing about my family, I've searched through newspaper archives, dug up death certicates (couldn't resist that low hanging fruit) written to government agencies, done geneological(sp?) research checked California Supreme Court records etc. In the course of doing the background research I found what I thought were some interesting facts about a person whom my family had "business" relations with (i.e. they almost got screwed blue by him. But he ran many other con-rackets) I researched it further and further and further. I found advertisements with this persons, schedules of his radio shows and I even procured "his" published material, recordings and thought that I had found something new and original. That was until I checked his son's obituary (!) and subsequent phone calls to my mother and found out what I thought was one person were actually two different people whose career paths were almost identical but they just happened to share a very, very uncommon name and lived at the SAME time period and the SAME geographical area that I was researching. All my research came crashing to the ground with that dull fact.