Big Mayo Files Lawsuit Against Food-Tech Startup Hampton Creek(eatdrinkpolitics.com) |
Big Mayo Files Lawsuit Against Food-Tech Startup Hampton Creek(eatdrinkpolitics.com) |
It seems like it'd be pretty easy for them to call it "Vegan Mayo," where folks are assuming there's a major substitute for a core ingredient. "Just Mayo," on the other hand, seems to claim the opposite.
It's still pretty whiny for Hellmann's/Best Foods/Unilever/Whomever to file the lawsuit, but that doesn't mean they're wrong.
If you get a vegan emulsifier to work as good or better than eggs, then go ahead and call it the generic, unprotected "mayo"- because that's what it is, and that's how it will be used.
This blog post/article is a bit hyperbolic with the whole the dirty egg industry thing.
A hamburger is beef. People often call them "burgers" for short.
Vegan substitutes exist, but they are called "veggieburgers", "gardenburgers", or similar, not "burgers".
If you try to sell gardenburgers as "burgers", you're being misleading, and you're likely to run afoul of the law.
>Unilever is asking the court not only to make Hampton Creek stop using the Just Mayo name (and remove all current product from store shelves), but also to pay Unilever the amount obtained from profits, plus triple damages.
I do not understand how our legal system entitles Unilever to anything.
First section says that someone using a misleading word or term "shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act." Second section says a winning plaintiff is entitled to profits, and up to treble damages.
1. guided by truth, reason, justice, and fairness: We hope to be just in our understanding of such difficult situations.
2. exactly or precisely: This is just what I mean.
The standard is actually super specific:
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRS...
for example you have to have at least 65% by weight oil and at least 2.5% acid.
If I buy something that has "mayonnaise" on it, then I’m buying "mayonnaise". If my sandwich sucks, then I won’t buy it again. No need for the government to tell me what is and isn’t mayonnaise.
Speak for yourself. When I buy spread for my sandwiches, I buy mayonnaise, not some ill-defined "spread". I'm sure I'm not the only one.
The entire point of labeling regulations is to prevent exactly this kind of misleading branding.
To me the true irony is that when it's some massive conglomerate labeling "pink slime" as meat, folks cry foul and demand government action. But when it's a sweetheart little startup being all "green" and "sustainable" while using similarly deceptive labeling (well, save that "pink slime" is at least a meat product whereas "Just Mayo" isn't mayo by any traditional definition), suddenly it's okay because they're the "good guys".
If I need "mayonnaise" for a recipe that depends on the specific chemical properties of the stuff (as a metaphor, see chocolate), I want to be sure that the stuff I'm buying at the store is actually oil+acid+egg that won't break down unexpectedly in my cooking. So by all means, I want regulation that ensures that "mayonnaise" is reasonably close to the actual stuff, and not some recreation that just happens to mimic the original.
Which, of course, goes against Hampton Creek's marketing.
But yeah, it isn't mayo. Might work like mayo, but it ain't mayo. If they just put something on the packaging that says it isn't mayo, that'd probably be good enough?
I'd be more concerned about the lack of sustainability in the other half of a tuna salad sandwich
I agree that "mayo" is generally considered to be synonymous with "mayonnaise" and that mayonnaise has a precise definition in the law, but neither of these are a trademark. The law doesn't define "mayo." It defines mayonnaise.
It's not clear to me if the standards of "confusingly similar" still apply in cases outside of trademark. I know this is a standard in trademark. It's not like they're marketing a non-dairy "malk", which is obviously OK.
Maybe they should change the product name to "Nellman's" and they would be better off. I went looking for any brand of Mayonnaise that markets itself as just "Mayo" and didn't find one.
> Now it’s true that FDA’s "standard of identity" (i.e., definition) for mayonnaise includes eggs; well specifically, "egg yolk-containing ingredients"
Okay. Case closed. It's not Mayo.
Well, that means it's not mayonnaise. But if they call themselves "mayo" (which doesn't have a standard of identity), and never "mayonnaise", I'm not so sure it's as clear that it's not Mayo.
I think consumers are smart enough to figure out whether or not the product they bought is mayonnaise. If it tastes like mayo, works like mayonnaise, smells like mayonnaise, is it not mayonnaise? Who cares if it has eggs, and why are the Feds getting involved anyway?
How does an "age of innovation" benefit from inaccurate product labeling. Its not like mayonnaise-substitutes that vary from the defining ingredients are new -- usually with branding that is evocative of mayonnaise without claiming to be mayonnaise, clearly indicating that it is: (1) something different than mayonnaise, (2) intended to fill the role of mayonnaise.
> Who cares if it has eggs, and why are the Feds getting involved anyway?
The Feds are concerned about accurate and meaningful food labeling because people being able to rely on food labels and no what they mean is important for both health and safety reasons, and for the ability of consumers to make informed decisions in the marketplace.
Misleading labeling benefits only fraudsters.
I noted above that Kraft also makes a real mayonnaise, which they call "Kraft Mayo".
I'm surprised they're not right in there with Unilever complaining about this.
Consider that "chocolaty" is considered a valid workaround for "chocolate", but the dictionary for "chocolaty" says "made of or like chocolate."
I don't see what the big hubub is about. Hellman can pursue all three strategies to win at the same time. Innovate, market, AND sue! Not to defend the system but it's the one we have and I don't blame them for taking advantage of it.
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http:/...
Traditional Mayonnaise used olive oil, most companies use soybean oil now for it's preservative properties and low price. I can't buy a 100% olive oil mayo, but Hellman's gets to cry about eggs?
After all, if it tastes the same, works the same, smells the same...
Age of innovation!
Disclaimer- I'm fine with most GMO, though I see no reason not to label it as such.
Anything can be a spread. Think that's jam? No! Fruit spread.
>INGREDIENTS: Non-GMO Expeller Pressed Canola Oil, Filtered Water, Lemon Juice, White Vinegar, 2% or less of the following: Organic Sugar, Salt, Pea Protein, Spices, Modified Food Starch, Beta-Carotene.*
Hellman's Mayonnaise
>SOYBEAN OIL, WATER, WHOLE EGGS AND EGG YOLKS, VINEGAR, SALT, SUGAR, LEMON JUICE, CALCIUM DISODIUM EDTA (USED TO PROTECT QUALITY), NATURAL FLAVORS. GLUTEN-FREE.
I don't see any misleading labeling here.
I feel like this is sort of the Turing test of food, given two jars, one FDA-approved and the other not. If you can't tell one from the other, aren't they both mayo?
No, they're not called "mayo".
Note that Hellman's/Best Foods biggest competitor, Kraft, makes both a mayonnaise ("Kraft Mayo") and a salad dressing ("Miracle Whip").
Seriously, it features an egg, which it doesn't have.