Oatly banned from using word ‘milk’ to label vegan drinks
www.independent.co.uk
The UK’s highest court has sided with the dairy industry in the long-running row
  • definitemaybe@lemmy.caEnglish
    91·
    17 days ago

    The title of the article is misleading. The ruling was on the use of “Post Milk Generation” as a trade mark for use in their advertising and on their products. It has nothing to do with using “milk” to describe their drinks.

    Sadly, every comment in this thread seems to be responding to the title at face value, not the actual court case.

    I think it’s a bit silly to prevent the trademark of that slogan, but I’m guessing that’s because I’m missing something in the nuance of what a trade mark is, legally, in the UK?

    Speculating here with an example of a trademark I know a little bit about: “Grill & Chill” was trademarked by DQ in several jurisdictions. (Aside: and they used that trademark to threaten the “Chill & Grill” restaurant to change its name, despite that use clearly predating DQ’s use of the name by decades, but I digress…) I suppose that’s allowed because “grilling” is directly related to the “trade” of DQ’s services, but something ephemeral like “being a post milk person” is only indirectly related to their “trade” of making non-dairy beverages?

    I suppose that makes sense. But still silly, imho.

    • BrikoX@lemmy.zipOPMEnglish
      1·
      17 days ago

      Its legal team contended that the trademark explicitly conveyed the absence of dairy milk in its offerings.

      Conversely, lawyers for Dairy UK argued that the phrase failed to clarify the product’s milk-free nature, instead referring to a specific demographic of consumers.

      You can’t not link it to “milk” directly as that was part of the legal argument.

      • definitemaybe@lemmy.caEnglish
        5·
        16 days ago

        ???

        I don’t understand what you’re trying to say.

        The Supreme Court decision was banning their use of the trademarked phrase. As far as I can tell, that’s it. If you can find something in there that contradicts that, I’m all ears. But nothing in the linked article, aside from the terrible headline, says anything about a court ruling on the term “oat milk”.

        Unless I missed something, this has no far-reaching consequences and is mostly a nothing burger.