Trademarking Newfangled Beverages: Is It Beer? Is It Seltzer? Is It Both?
Tips for navigating the complicated new world of drink, where advertising, regulation, and the trademark system all draw the lines between beverages differently.
September 16, 2022 at 10:00 AM
6 minute read
Once upon a time, beer was beer and came in cans or bottles; wine was wine and came in larger bottles; and cocktails were cocktails and weren't on the grocery-store shelf at all. In the past few decades, wine coolers, hard lemonades, wine beverages, hard seltzers, and now ready-to-drink cocktails have muddied the waters. To add to the confusion, advertising, regulation, and the trademark system all draw the lines between these beverages differently. Depending on the source of the alcohol in the beverage, a beverage marketed as a ready-to-drink cocktail could be taxed like distilled liquors or like beer and, similarly, could be classified with one or the other in its trademark registration.
The first question is whether a beverage contains distilled liquor or is a fermented alcohol. You might expect that a "Ready to Drink Screwdriver" would contain orange juice and vodka but most brands of ready to drink cocktails are not just canned cocktails, but rather fermented malt beverages flavored like those cocktails. As such, these are "flavored malt beverages," generally regulated like beer in most states. Some canned cocktails, often those branded by major spirits, are mixtures of distilled spirits with other ingredients, but this is not always the case: Smirnoff Ice is a flavored malt beverage, not diluted and flavored vodka, including its flavors named for vodka cocktails you might make with Smirnoff vodka. Canned cocktails (and other products) containing distilled spirits are usually regulated and taxed like distilled spirits.
Even if a beverage is fermented, not distilled, the base sugar (the source of the sugar that was fermented into alcohol) can affect its regulatory and trademark treatment. Beers and other malt beverages are fermented from malted grains, ciders are fermented from apples, and many hard seltzers are fermented from refined sugar. These are all usually treated similarly by state regulations, but some states treat them differently, and federal labeling requirements can be confusing.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBausch & Lomb Sues Competition Over Copycat Formulation and 'Confusingly Similar' Product Name
4 minute readFederal Circuit's 'LKQ' Decision Strikes Down Long-Standing Test for Design Patent Obviousness
8 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250