IMAGE : lbj

A bison burger - not to be confused with a McDonald's hamburger

McDonald's, an Olympic sponsor, has taken issue with the menu at the Aboriginal Pavilion for using the word "burger."

Chef Andrew George has had to change "a trio of bison burgers" to "a trio of bannockwiches," so as not to unintentionally piggyback on the familiarity and popularity of the bun-and-patty meal which, apparently, rightly belongs to the fast food giant. The rule banning certain special words is designed to protect the sponsor's "considerable commitment and investment."

But doesn't that seem a bit much? That common words and ideas should be owned by a corporation?

If they wanted to call it a Big 'Shuk' (i.e. Inukshuk), and layer thousand island dressing between three sesame seed buns, chopped lettuce and thin beef patties, then perhaps I could see why McDonald's was getting a bit huffy.

But this isn't even the same animal . . . literally! It's a bison patty "with sauteed mushrooms and Salt Spring Island goat's cheese between bannock rounds." Not only could you never in a million years confuse the two meals, it's unlikely that someone with a craving for one would be easily satisfied by the other, so it doesn't seem that either party is at risk of competing for the same customers.

The Aboriginal version will likely draw people interested in sampling as much local flavour as possible, slightly adventurous and epi-curious though not over-the-top, who want to eat gourmet and pay for it, or perhaps support the First Nations groups participating in the Games.

McDonald's, meanwhile, will still be packed with people who know what they like, want it fast and want it to provide the exact same flavour sensations they enjoy at home or anywhere else they travel. They want a sure thing, in other words.

Does anyone else think this seems insecure?