January 23, 2024
Authored and Edited by Maxime Jarquin; Morgan E. Smith
Product names can, themselves, be false claims. See, for example, Bayer’s All-Day Energy, Rust-Oleum’s Ultra Cover 2X spray paint, and Comcast’s 10G network. NAD’s most recent name change recommendation can be found in its RxSugar decision. While NAD tread more lightly in RxSugar than in other cases—it recommended that the name be “modified” rather than “discontinued” altogether—NAD’s willingness to rule on product names is alive and well.
The recommendation in this case stemmed from a challenge filed by the Sugar Association, Inc. (“SAI”). SAI argued that the “RxSugar” name falsely conveyed that the product contains table sugar, i.e., sucrose. In fact, SAI noted, Rx Sugar is made with allulose. (SAI also took issue with the “Rx” in the product name, contending that consumers would understand the product to be “prescription grade”—a theory that NAD rejected off the bat.)
NAD agreed with SAI’s concerns about the “Sugar” in “RxSugar.” It found that the “RxSugar” product name “expressly conveys the message that the products contain sugar.” How so? Notably, both parties pointed to different definitions of “sugar.” Nutrishus maintained that allulose is—technically speaking—a sugar. Nutrishus also pointed out that the FDA permits use of the term “sugar” in connection with substances other than sucrose when a qualifier indicates the sugar’s source. But NAD wasn’t swayed by these technical definitions.
Key Takeaways
|
Ultimately, NAD sided with SAI, reasoning that:
Notably, NAD reached its decision without relying on consumer perception evidence. (While challenger SAI did, indeed, provide a consumer survey, NAD rejected this evidence as insufficiently reliable.)
NAD’s RxSugar decision is an important reminder that while NAD notes its “reluctance” to issue name change recommendations in the absence of consumer surveys, reluctance is not unwillingness. Although Nutrishus seems unbothered by NAD’s decision—its Advertiser’s Statement notes that it “is pleased to include additional information on its label and in its advertising so that there can be no mistake that RxSugar is not what is commonly known as “sugar” (sucrose)”—decisions like these underscore that NAD is not afraid to stand in consumers’ shoes to construe the meaning of a product name.
Copyright © 2024 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.
Lecture
Patent Protection for Software-Related Inventions in Europe and the USA Training Course
June 5, 2024
Hybrid
10th Annual Georgia Asian Pacific American Bar Association Gala
May 29, 2024
Atlanta
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.