Will Dryject Management, LLC protect my right to use the DryJect mark and trade name?

According to Dryject's 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document, Dryject Management, LLC states that it will protect a franchisee's right to use the DryJect mark and trade name. The FDD indicates that Dryject will indemnify a franchisee against any losses, costs, or expenses resulting from claims, suits, or demands related to the franchisee's use of the DryJect marks or trade name. This protection extends to trademarks, service marks, trade names, logotypes, and other commercial symbols.

This commitment means that Dryject takes responsibility for defending its franchisees against legal challenges concerning the use of its brand identity. If a franchisee faces a lawsuit claiming trademark infringement related to their authorized use of the DryJect name, Dryject will cover the associated costs, including legal fees and potential damages. This indemnity provides a significant layer of security for franchisees, reducing their financial risk associated with intellectual property disputes.

However, as a franchisee, it is important to understand the specific terms and conditions of this protection as outlined in the franchise agreement. Franchisees should ensure they are using the DryJect marks and trade names in accordance with Dryject's guidelines and standards to maintain this protection. Any unauthorized use of the marks could void Dryject's obligation to indemnify the franchisee. Franchisees should also be aware of the procedures for notifying Dryject of any potential infringement or challenges to the DryJect marks, as prompt notification is likely required to trigger Dryject's protection.

In addition to the protection offered by Dryject, franchisees in Minnesota have additional rights under Minnesota law. Specifically, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 80C provides certain protections for franchisees, and nothing in the franchise agreement can reduce those rights. This includes rights related to termination, non-renewal, and transfer of the franchise, as well as prohibitions against certain unfair practices by the franchisor, such as requiring litigation to be conducted outside of Minnesota or requiring waiver of a jury trial.