Lanham Act In Action:
PIZZA HUT INC v. PAPA JOHN
INTERNATIONAL INC USA
Rachel Stockton
Professor Emerson
Business Law
March 16, 2018
Stockton 1
Introduction
Advertisements are everywhere. One simply cannot drive down the highway or watch an
episode of their favorite television show without seeing at least a few advertisements along the
way. People are heavily influenced by what they see and hear even if they aren’t cognizant of it
at the time. Considering how instrumental slogans and advertisements can be in affecting
behavior, one may wonder how these companies go about formulating these sayings as well as
getting them approved. Under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, a company is not allowed to
present a “misrepresentation of facts” or a false advertising claim.
1
However, the line between a
misrepresentation of facts and simply competitive advertising can sometimes be a tad ambiguous
as seen in the case of Pizza Hut International v. Papa John Inc. USA.
Initial False Advertising Lawsuit
Papa John’s famous advertising slogan “Better Ingredients, Better Pizza:” something we
are all familiar with and something most of us have probably not put much thought into.
However, if we were to put some thought into this trademark of Papa John’s we are led to the
infamous question of what exactly is better about their ingredients or pizza for that matter
compared to their competitors? Not only that, but how was this claim confirmed to be true in the
first place? If it was tested and confirmed to be true, who was surveyed and how representative
was their opinion of the general public? All of these questions led Pizza Hut to pursue a false-
advertising lawsuit against Papa John’s in Dallas in 1998, claiming that “scientific evidence
1
FindLaw, PIZZA HUT INC v. PAPA JOHN INTERNATIONAL INC USA
Stockton 2
showed that Papa John’s methods and ingredients made no difference in the pizza’s taste.
2
As if
this wasn’t bad enough for Pizza Hut, there was also a national advertising campaign going on at
the time that stated “Papa John’s won big time in taste tests over Pizza Hut and alleged Papa
John’s sauce and dough were better than Pizza Hut’s because they were made with fresh tomatoes
and filtered water”.
3
Pizza Hut felt that there was a genuine concern of basic fairness at hand
between the infamous slogan basically targeting them directly as well as the national advertising
campaign that actually targeted them directly. Considering all of this I can see where Pizza Hut
was coming from in the sense that they felt as though they were being unfairly targeted by their
main rival. They also felt as though they were negatively harmed as a business in result.
However, it’s also necessary to consider where Papa John’s was coming from in all of this
because at the end of the day everyone wants to do what’s best for their business and for their
business to ultimately succeed. So perhaps these actions by Papa John’s were simply their way of
