Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<i>Pom v. Coke</i> Could Create a Juicy Precedent on Food Labels
Food companies will be watching closely a Supreme Court case this spring that could establish the fate of private causes of action challenging food labeling. In a case brought by POM Wonderful (POM) against Coca-Cola Co., Inc. (Coke), the Supreme Court will decide “whether the court of appeals erred in holding that a private party cannot bring a Lanham Act claim challenging a product label regulated under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.” While the case focuses on federal law, it also has implications for state causes of action. In particular, the class action bar has been prolific in its challenges to food labels, and this case could affect the future viability of such actions.
Factual Background
On its website, POM calls itself the “largest grower of pomegranates in the United States.” Among its offerings, the company sells “POM WONDERFUL” brand bottled pomegranate juice and a pomegranate blueberry juice blend. Its competitor Coke markets a “pomegranate blueberry flavored” juice. Coke's product is 99.4% apple and grape juice, 0.3% pomegranate juice, 0.2% blueberry juice, and .1% raspberry juice. The parties cannot agree on the product's name, with POM saying it is called “Pomegranate Blueberry” and Coke retorting that the full name is “Pomegranate Blueberry Flavored Blend of 5 Juices.”
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?