Bradman family wins fight over cookies logo
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.By all accounts, Bradman's Chocolate Chip Cookies – named after the legendary Australian batsman and bearing a logo featuring his image – were a hit with cricket-loving Indians. But Sir Donald's family were not amused, and they sought compensation for the "Mickey Mouse"-style commercialisation of his legacy.
Yesterday, after six years of legal wrangling, the case – brought against a law firm that assigned Bradman's name to a charitable trust – was settled out of court. The terms remain confidential, but the cricketer's son, John, said the family was "very pleased".
"The Don", as he was often called, set up the Bradman Foundation before he died in 2001. But its relations with his descendants have been fraught, and the biscuits – sold in India and marketed by an Australian food company licensed by the foundation – sparked an unseemly public row.
John Bradman fumed: "Sir Donald is a loved and missed family member, not a brand name like Mickey Mouse."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments