An obscure government notion that big box stores should carry explanatory French wording accompanying their trademark logos has led to Quebec to a couple of court defeats but there's some notion that they are still not giving up.
A recent trial balloon has suggests that the provincial government might reopen language law Bill 101 to add a section forcing outlets such as Wal-Mart to carry "les magasins" with its logo, or Tim Horton's would have "les cafes," proceeding its familiar signage and so on.
In the world of real problems it's hard to figure why this would be a government priority so I rang up lawyer Brent Tyler who has been fighting to allow the merchants to stick with their logos.
![]()
Tyler tells Coolopolis that the new amendments would also fail simply because trademarks fall under the federal jurisdiction.
"It'd be hopelessly unconstitutional if any of my clients were prosecuted under this amendment," said Tyler who senses an ulterior motive in the government initiative.
"This is a cynical political ploy to lose in court. Then they'll be able to say 'gee without a distinct society clause we can't protect the French language.'" They would come back and say 'we need more powers, we cannot protect our language within this constitutional framework.'"
Tyler doesn't sound entirely convinced that the Liberal government will actually go through with the notion, which was first leaked by a French media personality named Benoit Dutrisac through his sources in the Parti Quebecois.
The government would have to pass the amendment and then prosecute a merchant for violating the rule. "I can guarantee you it wont be Wal-Mart. It'll be one of the little guys, one of my people. Then the courts will have to challenge the law and by then I'll be retired so I won't be involved," said Tyler.
A recent trial balloon has suggests that the provincial government might reopen language law Bill 101 to add a section forcing outlets such as Wal-Mart to carry "les magasins" with its logo, or Tim Horton's would have "les cafes," proceeding its familiar signage and so on.
In the world of real problems it's hard to figure why this would be a government priority so I rang up lawyer Brent Tyler who has been fighting to allow the merchants to stick with their logos.
"It'd be hopelessly unconstitutional if any of my clients were prosecuted under this amendment," said Tyler who senses an ulterior motive in the government initiative.
"This is a cynical political ploy to lose in court. Then they'll be able to say 'gee without a distinct society clause we can't protect the French language.'" They would come back and say 'we need more powers, we cannot protect our language within this constitutional framework.'"
Tyler doesn't sound entirely convinced that the Liberal government will actually go through with the notion, which was first leaked by a French media personality named Benoit Dutrisac through his sources in the Parti Quebecois.
The government would have to pass the amendment and then prosecute a merchant for violating the rule. "I can guarantee you it wont be Wal-Mart. It'll be one of the little guys, one of my people. Then the courts will have to challenge the law and by then I'll be retired so I won't be involved," said Tyler.