Collecting student ID numbers is a big no-no, given the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974. While the startup may not be bound by FERPA, Brown is responsible for protecting those student ID numbers. The University of Tennessee has a decent guide to the statute: http://ferpa.utk.edu/questions.php
A Sandwich, a Startup, and Soon, a Lawsuit? The Crunchbutton Story
21–25 of 25 posts
Re: A Sandwich, a Startup, and Soon, a Lawsuit? The Crunchbutton Story
#22It's not the Ivy League, just one member, Brown. And no one has been sued.
This was in response to the original false title for this submission.
Re: A Sandwich, a Startup, and Soon, a Lawsuit? The Crunchbutton Story
#23I imagine Brown has some sort of student run "Student Services", e.g. fridge rentals, bagel deliveries, bouncers, etc..., and would welcome service such as yours if it were run by its own students. Why not offer an affiliate/franchise campus program?
I remember when a student would walk through the dorms each afternoon, yelling 'Bagelman is here'. His business was sanctioned by the university, otherwise it was his own affair.
These days, instead of yelling, you could have a phone app which would alert customers that the seller is near, transmit orders to him/her, maybe even use a mobile payment scheme to complete the transaction for whatever.
Re: A Sandwich, a Startup, and Soon, a Lawsuit? The Crunchbutton Story
#24> The letter went on to demand that Crunchbutton stop listing Jo’s on its website; stop offering delivery service from any Brown dining establishment; stop collecting student ID numbers (for payment purposes); destroy any retained ID numbers; and stop using Brown facilities for any marketing or promotional activities. Except perhaps the first one, none of these seem unreasonable to me. The article also seems to gloss…
> it's generally bad form (even if not illegal per se, unless it amounts to trademark infringement) to make it seem like you have an association with them when you don't.
Doing this can be a violation of section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 USC 1125(a):
"(1) Any person who ... uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which— (A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, ... shall be liable in a civil action ...." (Emphasis added.)
Section 43(a) claims get litigated all the time.
Re: A Sandwich, a Startup, and Soon, a Lawsuit? The Crunchbutton Story
#25> The letter went on to demand that Crunchbutton stop listing Jo’s on its website; stop offering delivery service from any Brown dining establishment; stop collecting student ID numbers (for payment purposes); destroy any retained ID numbers; and stop using Brown facilities for any marketing or promotional activities. Except perhaps the first one, none of these seem unreasonable to me. The article also seems to gloss…
Your comment seems to imply that services like "Dining-In" and other Seamless providers that have independent delivery services require the blessing of the restaurant to engage in that activity. Is that actually true?
I don't think it's generally true, except to the extent that you try to make it seem like you do have the blessing of the restaurant to engage in the activity. That said, we're talking about a school-operated campus restaurant and on-campus deliveries, not just an independent restaurant.