Uh oh, better ban the term “coconut milk” too
Oatly banned from using word ‘milk’ to market plant-based products in UK
Submitted 2 weeks ago by Veserr@sh.itjust.works to unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
Comments
jaennaet@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
starman2112@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Peanut butter too. Someone could get confused!
jaennaet@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
And butterflies obviously need to be renamed to nondairyflies
Ephera@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
Here in the Ger of Many, you can buy scouring agents which are branded as “scouring milk” (Scheuermilch), but oat milk is where we draw the line, apparently.
flamingos@feddit.uk 2 weeks ago
On Wednesday the supreme court unanimously ruled that Oatly can no longer trademark, or use, the slogan “Post Milk Generation”.
This is even dumber when you realise Oatly is explicitly prompting themselves as not-milk.
Nighed@feddit.uk 2 weeks ago
That doesn’t stop them from calling the product “oat milk” though does it?
flamingos@feddit.uk 2 weeks ago
You haven’t been able to do that since 2017, the European Court of Justice said so.
Fedegenerate@lemmynsfw.com 2 weeks ago
This, this is what my country thinks is valuable to be doing right now? Not all the nonces that may or may not be being blackmailed by hostile powers? But that oat milk is called milk?
MurrayL@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
It’s a stupid decision but I don’t think the people in charge of this are the same people investigating blackmail by foreign powers.
Makes about as much sense as the people who say ‘why do we bother researching space when we have problems here on earth?’
Fedegenerate@lemmynsfw.com 2 weeks ago
I don’t think the people in charge of this are the same people investigating blackmail by foreign powers.
The supreme court?
Strawberry@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
In fairness, its a supreme court ruling after a dairy uk(3rd party) objected to a trademark and its been going on for awhile. So it’s not like it was specifically put on the agender by any government or authority.
Fedegenerate@lemmynsfw.com 2 weeks ago
I’m not sure why “in fairness” applys here? I don’t disagree it is a supreme court ruling after dairy UK objected to a trademark. I don’t disagree it’s been going on for a while.
What I’m disagreeing with is the supreme court not going “fuck off, you petty time wasting freaks”.
wewbull@feddit.uk 2 weeks ago
I’m all for clear labelling on food. I think it’s important. I don’t see the need to stop them using “milk” in any form. As long as it’s part of hyphenate “oat-milk” there shouldn’t be an issue.
davidagain@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Braindead ruling. Not as braindead as “the equality act was not intended to protect trans people” which is about as stupid and fucked up as it gets, but still really pretty braindead.
fakeman_pretendname@feddit.uk 2 weeks ago
Yet we can still buy “Milk of Magnesia” for poorly tummies.
austinfloyd@ttrpg.network 2 weeks ago
The thing I find funniest about that is that milk of magnesia is rather new to the English language (1880 according to the Oxford English dictionary). Meanwhile terms like almond milk that are “too confusing” have been in the English language since Middle English.
Fucking lobbyists…
Paragone@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
utterly-bullshit snowflakes…
Grow a pair!!
EVERYBODY KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE!
Idiocy.
DakRalter@thelemmy.club 2 weeks ago
Exactly, it’s still perfectly fine to sell tinned coconut milk, no one thinks it’s from udders.
Since the ruling is that only mammary secretions can be called milk, let’s insist that dairy is labelled “mammy secretions”, just so no one mistakes it as coming from coconuts.
ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
What about Man Milk? Can I keep calling it Man Milk?
mjr@infosec.pub 2 weeks ago
Only if it stays the hell away from my coffee! 🤮
jaennaet@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
Amateur
davidagain@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Not if you’re selling it in shops.
I think you’re in the clear if you’re just giving it away to people you like.
rmuk@feddit.uk 2 weeks ago
Eh, I agree. I’ll still call it “oat milk” but I don’t think they should be allowed to call it “milk” in any form. I get they have quirky marketing and, IMHO, a great product, but allowing a corporation to use a work like that laissez-faire is pretty dangerous: oat milk isn’t naturally occuring and their product has lots of extra stuff added in (sweeteners, fortifiers, etc), neither of which should be true for a productive called “milk”.
wpb@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
but I don’t think companies should be allowed to sell it as “milk” in any form
Well sure, and they haven’t been able to in almost a decade. This court ruling is about something else.
blackn1ght@feddit.uk 2 weeks ago
What about coconut milk?
rmuk@feddit.uk 2 weeks ago
Natural and unadulterated. So, yeah.
tenebrisnox@feddit.uk 2 weeks ago
Have the courts come to an actual definition of what (animal) milk actually is? Last I read, neither EU or UK could define it. Milk’s content differs so much from brand to brand and there’s no set standard. Presumably other than it comes from an animal of some kind.
Gold_E_Lox@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
yes! we shall stop the capitalists by monitoring their language! this time we’ll get em!
MousePotatoDoesStuff@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Malicious compliance time. Use “malk” instead and annoy them into reverting the ruling.
sirico@feddit.uk 2 weeks ago
Cool I don’t eat or drink words. Enjoy the lack of milk in my house dairy industry.
JoMiran@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
The dairy industry is losing market share at an accelerated rate. I’m sure this will fix it.
So stupid.
Strawberry@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
yeah, it feels kinda petty on behalf of the dairy people tbh