KFC wins "Teadog set meal" lawsuit

This story is being reported all over the internet.  It relies on translations from a Chinese news article, but the issue is more or less clear, even if the translations are not:

Tongzhou District court ruled on Tuesday that the two plaintiffs surnamed Jin would not get compensation from the KFC fast-food chain as they couldn't provide substantive evidence to prove the set meal had led to a "lower social evaluation" and reputation damage to them, as they claimed.

The meal was advertised under the name “Teadog Set Meal,” which the patron took to mean “man and dog sharing meal.”

He then sued KFC for insulting consumers, because "according to the advertisement, my grandson has eaten dog food and we two have become 'dog friends'", -- a term that means "a dissolute company" in Chinese.

Note: Substantive Evidence is defined as “Evidence offered to help establish a fact in issue” Black’s Law Dictionary  (7th ed. 1999). 

Thank you to William Mitchell College of Law student Emily Brooks-Lipor for finding this story and preparing this post.