Please help me to come up with an analytical summary  of the trademark infringement article about McDonald's versus McCluskey at the following link:

Expert Answers

An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

The article "McDonald's Attacks a Teen named McCluskey over Trademark Infringement" by David Gutierrez published in Natural News informs about the name of a Special Olympics-based fundraiser whose organizer has named after her last name, McCluskey, and has now the name of "McFest". The problem is Ms. McCluskey intended to trademark the name of the event.

The McDonald's corporation learned about this and responded by filing against it, citing that their corporation has had a history of using the "Mc" trademark to name its own products. The response of Ms. McCluskey is that she wants to trademark the event after her last name, and not after anything related to McDonald's. Moreover, she also claims that her event is not that well-known, for which it is unnecessary for the McDonald's corporation to feel threatened or alluded to.  Neither McCluskey nor McDonald's plan to change their plans of action.

These news have to be analyzed from a strictly legal, and not an emotional, perspective. While both parties intend the best, it is McDonald's responsibility to protect its brand. Like their spokesperson Angie Yingling mentions in the article:

We believe the mark at issue, 'McFest,' is similar enough to our brand name and McDonald's famous family of 'Mc' trademarks that it's likely to cause confusion under trademark standards and/or dilute our valuable trademark rights.

Even though Lauren McCluskey is correct in that her event is not that big to concern McDonald's, the reality is that the name that she has for her fest IS similar enough to the McDonald's brand products. It IS likely to cause a confusion under the trademark standards AND it could infringe in rights. Most importantly, it may set a precedence: if McCluskey wants to call something a "McFest", what would prevent another person of a last name that has Mc in it to try and trademark something else? Then McDonald's will really see its trademark rights diluted because anybody will have the chance to use the same style of marketing as the corporation. Therefore, it is important to see what effects in the long run may come up from allowing the free usage of "Mc" in any kind of marketing scenario. It is McDonald's, who has precedence over Ms. McCluskey's event, and its leverage in the commercial psyche grants the corporation the right to request that its trademark rights continue to be protected.
Approved by eNotes Editorial Team