Submitted 2 weeks ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to globalnews@lemmy.zip
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/oatly-milk-trademark-supreme-court-b2918307.html
The UK’s highest court has sided with the dairy industry in the long-running row
Archived version: archive.is/…/oatly-milk-trademark-supreme-court-b…
Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.
This has the same energy as credit unions being banned from using the word ‘bank’ as a descriptor.
The title of the article is misleading. The rolling was on the use of “Post Milk Generation” as a trademark 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 trademark 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.
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.
???
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.
Almond milk has been called ‘milk’ since it was first written about in the 13th century.
There is no logical reason people need the distinction made clearer 800 years later.
How many writers described her skin as milky white? Burn the books!
People kinda forgot that medieval people couldnt just constantly rely on the lactate-carnist duploly and had several alternatives now considered “trendy” “chemical” products.
Peanut butter isn’t butter, but it’s called that because enough people agreed to call it so. It’s a useful way to referring to something that has similar properties. Likewise, if I ask for a coffee I’ll continue to ask for oat milk and not ‘oat drink’ as the latter sounds stupid.
A milk is the result of the process of milking
It can produce other fluids as well.
eu
I wonder if Westeros would have ruled against the name “Milk of the poppy.” No? The UK officially has worse takes on law than The Seven Fucking Kingdoms.
Capitalism lol
I’ll have a latte with soy effluent, please.
Soy Juice
Just at “alternative” in tiny letters under each “milk” word.
Next up, no more hot dogs that don’t contain dog. No hamburgers that don’t contain ham.
It’s only called Hamburger if it comes from the small town of Hamburg, Germany. Otherwise you must call it reformed organ patty. Ti’s the law.
Is this about oat milk, the thing we all know isn’t goat milk or soy milk or camel milk or cow milk or almond milk or any other thing than oat milk?
Man, I know it’s typical and passé to pass on things with complex names, but it may have been a poor move. Imagine if people stayed away from “dihydrogen monoxide” bottles because they sound like chemically treated poison.
undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch 2 weeks ago
People who impregnate (rape) and abuse cows for their milk are so insecure about their product that they need to ban competition from using its word. It’s really pathetic to watch.
Skullgrid@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I take it you like eating meat?
undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch 2 weeks ago
Fuck no
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
no one is raping cows
piccolo@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
You do know how we get cows to produce milk right?