• BrikoX@lemmy.zipOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 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.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 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.