Aldi Beats Thatchers In ‘Cloudy Cider’ Trademark Dispute In UK
The last time we saw German-based grocer Aldi get into a trademark tiff over an alcohol product, it was with Brew Dog in the UK and it was one of the most good-natured trademark “disputes” on the record. While that whole thing was refreshing to see, not every company chooses to approach things in a human and awesome way.
Which brings us to Thatchers, based in Somerset, England. Thatchers makes a lemon cider product which it has very creatively named “cloudy lemon cider.” Aldi released its own lemon cider product, calling it “Taurus Cloudy Cider,” noting that it is lemon flavored on the packaging as well. Because of those names, and because the packaging for both products has base colors of lemon and green — because, you know, lemons — Thatchers took Aldi to court for trademark infringement.
Martin Thatcher, a fourth-generation cider maker at the family firm, said it was “compelled” to bring the case “as we were concerned that the packaging of international retailer Aldi’s product was misleading shoppers due to the strong resemblance to Thatchers Cloudy Lemon Cider”.
As you’ll see from the source article below, the product packaging indeed has similarities. That is due to the nature of the product, though. Beyond that, the name of both products, other than the brand names for them, are almost purely descriptive. You ought no more be able to trademark the term “cloudy lemon cider” than you should be able to trademark “hazy IPA.” And, though Aldi has stipulated that it built this product on the standard of Thatchers’ product, that doesn’t suddenly make any of this trademark infringement.
The courts, thankfully, agreed.
Judge Clarke said she was “satisfied on the balance of probabilities” that seeing the Aldi product “would call to mind” the Thatchers trademark, causing “a link in the mind of the average consumer”. But she concluded that Aldi had not infringed and was not liable for “passing off”, adding that the German supermarket’s product did not take unfair advantage of nor was “detrimental” to the reputation of the Thatchers trademark.
Judge Clarke found that Aldi did not develop its product “with an intention to take advantage of the goodwill and reputation” of the Thatchers trademark, adding that she was satisfied “there is no misrepresentation that Aldi is connected in trade with Thatchers”.
That decision is as refreshing as a cloudy lemon cider on a hot summer day. I’m trying to imagine a ruling like this coming out of a United States court and it just doesn’t compute. It would be entirely too easy to note the similar product names, the color schemes in the packaging, and just start screaming infringement and call it a day.
Instead, the judge took the time to actually really think about whether customers were actually going to be confused here, given the larger context of the packaging, the products, and product names. Trademark law could use much more of this sort of thing.