Food manufacturers battle over ownership rights of trademarked colors

LONDON A recent legal battle against Australian chocolate company Darrell Lea has Cadbury showing its true colors as it fights to protect its trademarked color purple. The confectionary manufacturer is in the middle of a lawsuit accusing Darrell Lea of using purple packaging to purposefully deceive consumers into thinking the products were made by British sweets manufacturer Cadbury.

In April, the Federal Court of Australia ruled in favor of Darrell Lea, stating that the chocolate company had not breached the Trade Practices Act and had not designed its packaging to appear Cadbury-produced. Cadbury plans on continuing the fight, saying it will appeal the judge’s decision.

The heated battle truly exemplifies how important and valuable a brand has become in today’s market. Millward Brown Optimator reported that Coca-Cola’s brand is worth a whopping $58.2 billion. Ever since laws were passed in the 1990s allowing companies to trademark colors, corporations have jumped on the opportunity to personalize their brands with color. UPS registered a particular shade of brown, Tiffany’s trademarked a blue tone and McDonalds owns a certain shade of red and yellow.

Registering a color trademark prevents other companies from using a color shade within a particular marketing context. Cadbury is essentially fighting for its trademark on the color purple and defending its accusation of Darrell Lea’s use of purple to deceive consumers. “At the moment, Cadbury currently has uncertainty as to whether it can enforce its color purple in Australia,” said Gary Assim, head of intellectual property at UK law firm Shoosmiths.