Supermarket aisles are quite competitive areas. Stores really want to catch your eye there. Winning often depends on shelf appearance.
Global snack giant Mondelēz International feels that discount retailer ALDI has crossed a line. ALDI used packaging for its store-brand cookies and crackers. This caused a federal lawsuit claiming trademark issues in Illinois.
Mondelēz says ALDI’s packaging for snacks copies its brands. It claims that ALDI’s packaging “blatantly copies” the appearance of the popular items. This might mislead shoppers and hurt Mondelēz’s good name.
The company based in Chicago makes OREO, Wheat Thins, and Nutter Butter cookies. It files the lawsuit saying ALDI used “nearly identical packaging”. This strategy “trades upon the valuable reputation and goodwill” of Mondelēz’s items.
The court papers list more affected brands, such as Ritz crackers. Nilla Wafers and Chips Ahoy! are also included, as well as Triscuit, Teddy Grahams, Belvita biscuits, and Tate’s Bake Shop cookies.
Mondelēz’s main point is that the packaging similarity is “likely to deceive and confuse consumers”. The lawsuit suggests that ALDI shoppers might think they are buying Mondelēz products or feel that ALDI is somehow connected to the well-known snacks.
This confusion could “dilute the distinctive quality of Mondelēz’s unique product packaging”. Allowing this could “threaten to irreparably harm Mondelēz and its valuable brands”. It is a serious concern for them.
Product on Amazon: Selena Gomez OREO Cookies, Limited Edition, 10.68 oz
Brand: Oreo
Binding: Unknown Binding Product Group: Grocery
Price: 4.88 USD
Features:
1. One 10.68 oz pack of Limited Edition Selena Gomez OREO Cookies
2. Horchata-inspired treat featuring a layer of Chocolate and Cinnamon Flavor Creme atop another layer of Sweetened Condensed Milk Flavor Creme with Cinnamon Sugar Inclusions sandwiched between two OREO Chocolate Cinnamon Flavored wafer cookies
3. Chocolate cinnamon flavored wafer cookies embossed with six unique designs inspired by Selena Gomez’s world of music
4. Selena Gomez OREO Cookies with packaging graphics that show the rare Selena Gomez Signature Cookie featured in an eye-catching, sleek, ruby red headphones design; QR code on pack to unlock exclusive content
5. Selena’s Signature Chocolate and Cinnamon Creme OREO Cookies in a resealable pack with easy-pull tab to help keep snack cookies fresh and ready to enjoy and share; fantastic party snacks
Shopping on Amazon >>
The lawsuit papers show visual proof for Mondelēz’s argument. Side-by-side pictures compare the ALDI items with Mondelēz snacks. Court documents highlight striking similarities in packaging parts.
Key elements like colors, typefaces, and symbols look much the same. Specific examples show the alleged copying nature. ALDI’s Thin Wheat crackers come in a gold box.
Mondelēz argues that this box is very similar to their own Wheat Thins box. This visual similarity for the same product type is meant to remind buyers of Mondelēz. That’s from their perspective.
The lawsuit also details the same things for cookie products. Mondelēz’s Nutter Butter cookies come in red bags with a peanut shape. ALDI’s Peanut Butter Créme Filled Cookies also use red packaging.
ALDI’s version shows a round cookie with peanut pictures. It does not have the distinct peanut shape. Still, using lots of red packaging is a big point of similarity alleged by Mondelēz.
More comparisons mention chocolate chip and sandwich cookies. Mondelēz’s Chips Ahoy! and OREO cookies always have blue packaging. The lawsuit notes that ALDI’s Chocolate Chip Cookies and Original Chocolate Sandwich Cookies have blue packaging too.
The words and images on ALDI’s packages reportedly look different from Mondelēz’s. But the shared use of the blue color is part of the copying pattern alleged. This is for these cookie types.
Mondelēz says their concerns about this confusing packaging are not a new issue. The lawsuit claims Mondelēz contacted ALDI many times already. They talked about the similar designs before filing the federal case.
These talks aimed at resolving the issue without going to court. ALDI reportedly made some changes after these prior contacts. Mondelēz admits ALDI “discontinued” and “changed certain of these infringing products”.
Product on Amazon: Milk Chocolate Covered Butter Cookies – 4.4-Ounce Boxes (Pack of 2)
Brand: Specially Selected
Binding: Product Group: Grocery
Price: 14.98 USD
Shopping on Amazon >>
Read more about: Navigating Grocery Bills: Why Aldi’s Value Proposition Resonates with Shoppers
This was after contact about alleged copycats like the Oreo cookie design. Teddy Grahams, Belvita biscuits, Triscuit crackers, and Tate’s Bake Shop cookies were changed. However, Mondelēz claims ALDI didn’t change enough items.
Despite changing some, the lawsuit says ALDI “continued to sell others”. The supermarket also kept making what Mondelēz calls “unacceptable copies”. This persistence with package design led to the formal legal action.
The lawsuit gives a view on ALDI’s business way. Mondelēz says ALDI focuses on “low-priced private label products”. These products resemble the look and feeling of well-known brands. This suggests Mondelēz thinks the similarities are not accidental.
They see it as an intentional strategy. It aims to use the popularity of established brands. The core legal claim from Mondelēz mentions trademark infringement. It also cites unfair competition and unjust enrichment.
These are common claims in lawsuits like this. One company says the other benefits unfairly. This happens by using a very similar identity or packaging. Mondelēz wants specific results from the court case.
The company seeks money for the damage already caused. This is from ALDI’s alleged actions. Very importantly, Mondelēz wants a court order. This order would make ALDI stop selling the identified products.
These are products allegedly infringing on trademarks. Such an order would force ALDI to change or remove packaging. This must happen from their shelves in the US. ALDI U.S. has not replied publicly yet.
Product on Amazon: Toblerone White Chocolate, 3.52-Ounce Bars (Pack of 12)
Brand: Toblerone
Binding: Grocery Product Group: Grocery
Price: 34.75 USD
Features:
1. Pack of 12, 3.52 ounce bars
2. Made in Switzerland
3. Pack of 12, 3.52 ounce bars (total of 42.24 ounces)
4. Made in Switzerland
5. Contains milk chocolate with almonds
Shopping on Amazon >>
Read more about: Beyond the Kitchen: Unpacking the Realities of Restaurant Closures and Culinary Careers
They didn’t respond to press questions about the lawsuit. Their position on the allegations is not public. No statements or media answers explain it. The lawsuit continues in federal court.
This is for the area of the Northern District of Illinois. The legal process will unfold there. It will address Mondelēz’s claims regarding ALDI’s store – brand packaging. This is about snacks and crackers in America.
This legal challenge highlights a careful balance for companies. They must find this balance when making private – label goods. Retailers want to offer cheaper options for shoppers. But they must follow trademark laws.
These laws prevent confusion. They protect well – known brands from looking the same. Mondelēz’s filing says ALDI’s choices tip this balance too far. It creates a situation where buyers are likely to get confused.
Read more about: The Gut-Wrenching Truth Behind the Liver King’s $100 Million Empire: Steroids, Raw Organs, and the Lie That Built a Kingdom
This confusion comes from visual similarities. These are seen in ALDI’s aisles. This is across over 2,400 locations in the United States.
The US federal lawsuit from Mondelēz against ALDI was filed. This legal fight is part of a bigger story. It involves ALDI’s unique way of doing business. Their approach to private – label branding also plays a role. ALDI is famous for selling low – cost store – brand items. These products often look similar to well – known national brands. Their strategy lets them offer cheaper options. This has helped them grow, especially in places like the United States. ALDI is expanding fast there.
Making products look like established brands has caused troubles. ALDI faced several legal disputes because of this. These problems happened in different countries over time. The lawsuit by Mondelēz in the US is just one example. It is the newest instance in a pattern of legal issues. These cases concern ALDI’s packaging and branding choices.
A major recent instance occurred in the United Kingdom. A cider maker called Thatchers won a lawsuit. This case was against ALDI over their lemon cider product. Thatchers argued ALDI copied their trademark design. They won without needing to prove customer confusion. ALDI tried to appeal this decision in court. The UK Supreme Court rejected their attempt. This decision upheld the ruling for Thatchers.
That Thatchers case result raised questions. It asked about the sustainability of ALDI’s private – label strategy. This was particularly true under certain legal systems. Thomas Chartres – Moore discussed the effect of the ruling. He works for a law firm and handles intellectual property. He told The Grocer magazine that ALDI might need to change how it operates. This was because Thatchers won without showing confusion. This differs from what is needed in the current US case.
ALDI also had a legal problem in Australia recently. They lost a lawsuit concerning baby food packaging. This case involved their Baby Bellies puffs snack. An Australian court found that ALDI copied the packaging. The court ruled that ALDI infringed on the maker’s copyright. The judge mentioned that ALDI used the design for their gain. He described ALDI’s behavior as flagrant, which meant it was openly wrong or offensive behavior.
Adding to this history, ALDI was sued again this March. This happened in the UK by a fruit drinks company. That lawsuit also claimed ALDI copied package design. Specific results are not fully known here. However, it shows ALDI keeps facing legal challenges. These concern their private – label packaging decisions globally.
These cases from other countries provide context. They show ALDI’s designs receive legal review. This isn’t just limited to one market or product kind. It reflects a global habit. Competitors challenge ALDI’s method of copying brand appearances. But laws vary between countries for trademark cases. Rules differ for proving infringement of trademarks.
The US lawsuit requires Mondelēz to prove something. They must show consumers are likely to be confused. Melanie King is a lawyer who does intellectual – property court work. She explained this rule to a magazine called Store Brands. She said Mondelēz needs to show ALDI’s packaging probably causes confusion. This means they do not need actual proof of confusion. They only need to show a strong possibility of confusion. A typical shopper might get confused easily. They might think the ALDI product is linked to Mondelēz. Or maybe think it is a store – version by Mondelēz itself.
Despite this point, ALDI has a possible defense. They could argue that regular shoppers know their store model. ALDI could claim loyal customers understand they buy store brands. These shoppers do not expect national – brand items. Melanie King made this point clear. She said frequent ALDI customers know they are buying store – brand options. They are well aware of this when they shop.
This argument relies on shopper experience. Shopping at ALDI sets customer expectations, they could say. Customers know the store is for private labels and low prices. ALDI might claim similar packaging does not cause confusion. They could argue their shopping setting prevents actual mix – ups. King further explained packaging details. She noted it does not say you buy OREOS, for instance. It presents the product as ALDI’s version instead. This is true even if it looks similar to the name brand. This difference could be key for ALDI’s defense argument. It helps against the likely – confusion claim. Trademark lawyer Josh Gerben commented on such issues. He is not working on the Mondelēz case though. He mentioned trademark law protects customers first. The law makes sure people know who they are buying from. He stated customers assume they recognize the name and brand. This trust comes from steady branding efforts. Trademark law tries to guard that trust.
However, Gerben acknowledged these situations are complex. He said drawing a line in copying cases is hard. These lawsuits often need court analysis case by case. There is no simple test for infringement. This means the Mondelēz case outcome depends on several things. The court must weigh packaging similarities carefully. It will look at the ALDI shopping environment too. Evidence about likely consumer confusion must be strong.
The size of ALDI’s operations in the US is important. It shows how significant this lawsuit really is. ALDI has over 2,400 stores nationwide already. They announced plans for 225 more just next year. This fast growth means their products reach many Americans. Their branding approach affects more shoppers too. ALDI’s CEO Jason Hart spoke about company values. He said they build their reputation on giving value. This is done without taking shortcuts, he claimed. He also mentioned their aim. It is giving shoppers an affordable, fun experience. He pointed to their expansion plans. He said these help them reach that goal for more people.
The Mondelēz lawsuit is a big challenge therefore. It targets a business model crucial to ALDI’s identity. It is part of their growth strategy also. The question of packaging similarity comes to court now. This applies to private – label branding directly. It faces legal review in the US market. This case draws on past battles internationally. But it uses US trademark law rules now. Proving likely customer confusion is critical here.
Related posts:
Do ALDI’s Private Labels Cross the Copycat Line?
Oreo maker sues Aldi over alleged cookie copy
Oreo maker sues Aldi in US over ‘copycat’ packaging
