Oatly
Climate warning
Climate warning
Ingmar Rentzhog
149 w
•
•
Suing a competitor with the same argument big dairies using against Oatly
Dear Oatly! I really like your product. I drink it daily. I have defended you against criticism when you brought in new investors who are not sustainable themselves. Tried to make others understand that you do not always can choose your investors if you want to grow. That you, after all, stand for better values and can influence your owners from within. I have been on your side and signed your petitions against the big dairy companies who with the help of legal means tried to stop you from calling your oat drink for oat milk. I have bought your own arguments that big diaries have no right to the name milk or design of their packaging. I have bought your argument that your business's main priority is that you want to help reduce the world's emissions. But now I honestly don't know anymore. What are your motives for suing a small family-owned Oat company for using the letter oaty (Pureoaty) in their name and by having a blue color on their packaging like yours? Do you seriously believe consumers can't tell the difference? Of cause they can. Shouldn't consumers choose your product based on the taste and your sustainability work? Not because you have the most expensive lawyers? I would like an answer to this climate warning. Why are your arguments protecting your “intellectual property” better than big dairies' arguments doing the same? And exactly how do you see this helping the climate? I hope your answer is good. Otherwise, I have to stop buying your products. I think many agree. Companies must work together to solve the climate crisis. We don't have time to sue each other. Some companies even give away their patents for free to speed up change in society. What do you do? Some links: Oatly campaign against big dairy https://www.oatly.com/int/stop-plant-based-censorship Oatly suing Pureoaty manufacture https://www.farmersguide.co.uk/oatly-accused-of-bullying-british-family-farm-in-trademark-row/ Picture: Do you think they look the same?
Do you agree?
231 more agrees trigger scaled up advertising
Pinned by We Don't Have Time
Dear Ingmar! Thank you for reaching out and for everything you’ve done for us so far, we hope this response will show you that we are still the same company with the same sustainable mission. We still want to make it easier for people to eat and drink healthy, tasty foods without taxing the planet’s resources. We want to inspire and encourage all food companies to go plant-based, even oat-based if they like, in their own unique way. This recent lawsuit is not about that. A lot of people think our disagreement with Glebe Farm is about the packaging or the use of the word oat or oats. Like you, they draw parallels to our campaign against Amendment 171. First, let us clarify that we are still not allowed to call oat drink ‘milk’ in Europe. Amendment 171 was about the milk lobby wanting to take it even further and convince the EU to prevent the entire plant-based category from using phrases like “Use as cream”, “This is not milk” and comparing the Co2e-emissions between plant-based and animal-based dairy. Luckily, the EU politicians prevented the milk lobby from succeeding in this and we can still call our oats creamy, use the same sort of packaging and tell consumers it’s not milk from a cow. Just like we think all oat-based companies should be able to use the same sort of packaging and call their oats oat. This recent lawsuit is not about that either. What is it about then? If we say we hope to inspire others – companies and consumers – to join the plant-based revolution, why do we do this? Our first patent was released to the world in 2014 and has since been available for all to use. Around the same time we did a rebranding and aimed for the global market, wanting to show everyone that you can put sustainability first and still do good profitable business. Because, as you say, we’re all in the same team when it comes to the planet and the climate. A few companies caught on early, and in the last couple of years we’ve seen many more join in. We are working together to solve the climate crisis (or the parts of it we have the power to change anyway). Big dairy companies are doing oat drinks now. That’s a win for the planet we didn’t dare to even imagine when we started out in the 1990’s. Global investors are looking for plant-based and sustainable companies to invest in. That’s another giant win. This year we took it to the next level and went public. This means we now have a lot of new shareholders – a huge variety of investors, some of them small private ones, people who have decided to bet their savings on our idea. So, yes, we are all on the same team. But we will only win if all players are ready to do the work needed and find their own voice. We cannot have some players sitting on the shoulders of others all the way to the finish line. Some might unintentionally tag along for the ride, and others might do it intentionally. And when it comes to trademark protection, there’s no distinction between the two. If we want to protect the uniqueness of Oatly that we’ve worked for over a long period of time - a uniqueness that has been an essential voice in the plant-based movement – this is the path we need to take. There is no denying the similarities between OATLY and OATY and that’s why we asked Glebe Farm to stop using it, first outside of the court room and then inside it. If they are allowed to use the word OATY in their branding, it will make it free for all to use, and we could very well have a dairy company producing an oat drink under the name THE ORIGINAL OATY. No thanks. We would love for Glebe Farm to continue selling their oat drink in the way they sell their Almond drink, Soya drink and Coconut drink. All we ask is that every player on the team do the work and find their own unique voice. That’s what this is recent lawsuit is about.
10
•
143 w
Oatly has just lost this case https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/pureoaty-v-oatly-cambs-family-21233155
7•
143 w
Their is a lesson for @oatly and others in this.
1
•
•
147 w
100% Agree
1•
147 w
I find Oatly's logic as expressed in this thread contorted and frankly, hard to take seriously. It is just self-serving commercial bullying of a smaller potential competitor that is less equipped to pay substantial legal fees. I have been a loyal buyer of Oatly but this really puts me off. If I see PureOaty on the shelf I shall buy it to support them.
4•
•
•
148 w
Climate hero!!
5•
148 w
Thank you for responding. The big should encourage the small as “industry colleagues”. I look fwd to reading the court ruling hoping to see more substance than what is now displayed. There is room for a huge amount “Oaty” drinks on this planet substituting the dairy options. You need competition to take you to a more favorable price point ! If you are a “good company” you need to work harder to scale (out) to a price affordable to the larger group global citizens.
5•
•
•
148 w
Great input, we do encourage the smaller companies to go for it in their own way and welcome healthy competition (even between players on the same team). Everything we do is a first and a lot of research goes into the products, sustainability development and projects like this https://sustainability.oatly.com/us-oat-pilot-program/. It all affects the pricing and plant-based drinks don’t have the same kind of subsidiaries that dairy production enjoys (so in a way the pricing of plant-based is the more ‘normal’ one). But finding new ways to make oat drink affordable for everyone is something we’re definitely interested in exploring.
6
•
149 w
Hi @oatly, I appreciate your comments here I wasn’t expecting to see an actual response from your team. Can you disclose what you’d ask Glebe Farm to do should you win the case? Like can they run through all their pre-purchased packaging first? As I’m assuming they’ll like have tens of thousands of cartons sitting around with that branding.
2•
•
•
149 w
Hi Ross! We don’t want to say anything that might affect the outcome in any direction, hope you understand. We will be able to talk about things like this after the verdict, so feel free to remind us if we don’t get back to you. In general, we want to be fair and do things in the most sustainable way possible.
3
•
149 w
Oatly, We've read your response and it is baseless. Nuff said.
2•
•
•
149 w
Hello the collective John! Thank you all for reading anyway.
3
•
•
•
149 w
Dear Ingmar! Thank you for reaching out and for everything you’ve done for us so far, we hope this response will show you that we are still the same company with the same sustainable mission. We still want to make it easier for people to eat and drink healthy, tasty foods without taxing the planet’s resources. We want to inspire and encourage all food companies to go plant-based, even oat-based if they like, in their own unique way. This recent lawsuit is not about that. A lot of people think our disagreement with Glebe Farm is about the packaging or the use of the word oat or oats. Like you, they draw parallels to our campaign against Amendment 171. First, let us clarify that we are still not allowed to call oat drink ‘milk’ in Europe. Amendment 171 was about the milk lobby wanting to take it even further and convince the EU to prevent the entire plant-based category from using phrases like “Use as cream”, “This is not milk” and comparing the Co2e-emissions between plant-based and animal-based dairy. Luckily, the EU politicians prevented the milk lobby from succeeding in this and we can still call our oats creamy, use the same sort of packaging and tell consumers it’s not milk from a cow. Just like we think all oat-based companies should be able to use the same sort of packaging and call their oats oat. This recent lawsuit is not about that either. What is it about then? If we say we hope to inspire others – companies and consumers – to join the plant-based revolution, why do we do this? Our first patent was released to the world in 2014 and has since been available for all to use. Around the same time we did a rebranding and aimed for the global market, wanting to show everyone that you can put sustainability first and still do good profitable business. Because, as you say, we’re all in the same team when it comes to the planet and the climate. A few companies caught on early, and in the last couple of years we’ve seen many more join in. We are working together to solve the climate crisis (or the parts of it we have the power to change anyway). Big dairy companies are doing oat drinks now. That’s a win for the planet we didn’t dare to even imagine when we started out in the 1990’s. Global investors are looking for plant-based and sustainable companies to invest in. That’s another giant win. This year we took it to the next level and went public. This means we now have a lot of new shareholders – a huge variety of investors, some of them small private ones, people who have decided to bet their savings on our idea. So, yes, we are all on the same team. But we will only win if all players are ready to do the work needed and find their own voice. We cannot have some players sitting on the shoulders of others all the way to the finish line. Some might unintentionally tag along for the ride, and others might do it intentionally. And when it comes to trademark protection, there’s no distinction between the two. If we want to protect the uniqueness of Oatly that we’ve worked for over a long period of time - a uniqueness that has been an essential voice in the plant-based movement – this is the path we need to take. There is no denying the similarities between OATLY and OATY and that’s why we asked Glebe Farm to stop using it, first outside of the court room and then inside it. If they are allowed to use the word OATY in their branding, it will make it free for all to use, and we could very well have a dairy company producing an oat drink under the name THE ORIGINAL OATY. No thanks. We would love for Glebe Farm to continue selling their oat drink in the way they sell their Almond drink, Soya drink and Coconut drink. All we ask is that every player on the team do the work and find their own unique voice. That’s what this is recent lawsuit is about.
10•
149 w
Hi Oatly, Thanks for your reply. The two words you are comparing here are OATY & OATLY, however the brand name you are contesting is PUREOATY. Anyone talking about it will never call it OATY, but will refer to it as PUREOATY. In other words, you have your unique name OATLY only for you, without any doubts or confusion.
5•
•
•
149 w
@Muhammad_Fahd_Khan We can't really comment on the details of the case more than we have shared here https://www.oatly.com/uk/oatly-vs-glebe-farm and in the answer above, as it's still an ongoing process. All we can do is repeat that we would love for Glebe Farm to continue selling their oat drink in the way they sell their Almond drink, Soya drink and Coconut drink. Our aim here was to provide you with the 'Why' that some felt was missing and make it clear that this is not about destroying another company, as there are no risk of such a thing happening. It's cool if you don't agree with us, at least now you know what you're not agreeing with.
2•
•
•
148 w
Dear @Oatly! Thank you so much for taking this seriously and that you take the time to give a long answer to the We Don't Have Time community. I have written an article about what I think you should do. I would love to hear your opinion about it. As an entrepreneur that has previous experience from big corporations doing everything in their power to protect their IP, I have some insights you might find useful. I think your success is not in some letters in your name. You are so much better! "Oatly, it is more than some letters in a name that makes a business successful." https://app.wedonthavetime.org/posts/12b0b3c2-d94c-492f-9b9a-ef49d19a6044 Maybe it is too late for you to change your decision now. I still want to give you credit for your openness and transparency. I will continue to drink your milk, But it would taste a lot better if you change your mind about this issue ;)
5•
148 w
Good answer @oatly
1
•
•
•
149 w
Dear Ingmar Rentzhog Thank you for getting your climate warning to level 2! We have reached out to Oatly and asked for a response. I will keep you updated on any progress! /Adam We Don't Have Time
3•
•
•
149 w
Hey Adam, thanks for pointing us in Ingmar's direction and for helping us in creating an account. A response has been posted.
4
•
149 w
Change your focus @Oatly! How about living your values? Quote: “We promise to be a good company which means that our drive to help people upgrade their lives always comes before the reckless pursuit of profit.” https://us.oatly.com/pages/the-oatly-way
3•
•
•
149 w
Hi Ingrid, we don’t think this lawsuit is a breach of our values that we strive towards every day. For us, this is about protecting the work we’ve done since we started and we would love for you to read the answer we posted to Ingmar’s concerns in this thread.
4
•
149 w
dear @Ingmar Rentzhog. I agree we need answers from Oatly. Personally, I totally support @Glebe Farm Foods Limited. This is a very bulling action with no foundation... this kind of actions are a classic intimidating move that is done by corps, when the market niche and supply chain start to be eroded by small size competition (mind you, Glebe oat milk is also gluten free - Oatly is not). The big boys club narrative is "You either buy them or your destroy them at the drumroll of lawsuits." Ultimately, the purpose is to buy out the competition. Did you know that Oatly is planning to open a new plant 10 miles away from Glebe Farms? https://www.worldcoffeeportal.com/Latest/News/2021/March/Oatly-announces-plans-to-open-new-UK-factory-in-20 It is outreageus to bring small businesses to their knees in a time when plant-based dairy alternatives are so extremely needed and the market is growing. Enlarge the pie folks, instead of undercutting the slide! @Howard Schultz @Oprah Winfrey @Natalie Portman @JAY-Z what do you all think?
4•
•
•
149 w
Hello Isabella, we are not out to destroy Glebe farm, and there is no risk of this lawsuit doing that. It's simply a disagreement being settled in court. Our factory is being built in Peterborough and Glebe Farm is in Huntingdon if we understand it correctly. We've posted an answer now, would love if you have the time to read it.
3
•
149 w
100% Agree with Ingmar. Every company should be able to protect their IP, when there is legitimate infringement. There is clearly NO trademark or design infringement in this case. Oatly is simply using their new financial capital to try to push out the competition. There biggest risk here is that their customer base who are conscious people, see right through this tactic. As Ingmar and Melanie says what a waist of $$$ and human resources, that could have focused on really impact instead.
4•
•
•
149 w
Isn't there some resemblance between OATLY and OATY? Our reason is to be able to continue to have real impact through our unique voice, and we encourage other companies to find their uniqueness and use it for equally real impact.
2•
149 w
@oatly There is resemblance between OATLY and OAT, so there's no limit to what you can challenge. You chose a plain (but catchy) name, so it's going to be similar to other names that are based on the word OAT. Tough luck. Stop trying to wiggle your way out of this, it's not doing you any favors.
2•
149 w
@filip_skobic You are right Filip! but it seems that Oatly is now under the 'mindset' that it owns the word.
1•
•
•
149 w
@filip_skobic We have no problem with oat. In fact that's what we wrote "We would love for Glebe Farm to continue selling their oat drink in the way they sell their Almond drink, Soya drink and Coconut drink."
2•
149 w
@oatly thank you for your active stakeholder engagement! Disregarding the public opinion side of the law suit, I would argue on the following grounds that Oatly does not have an infringement claim based on trademark law in the EU, and presuming that the UK still follows the principles of the EU trademark directive. 1. I would argue that the word Oaty, itself as a single word, is not eligible for a wordmark and thus cannot be an infringing word as claimed by Oatly. DIRECTIVE (EU) 2015/2436 Art. 4.1(d). Oaty is a common word adjective meaning like or containing oats. AND the word Oaty and Oat is customary, and not arbitrary, to the actual product of oat milk. It tastes oaty! Note that the same logic applies to trademarks in the US as well. 2. The brand name that is in the public domain is PureOaty, not Oaty. PureOaty is distinctive and by no means can be confused with the wordmark Oatly. See test A below. Honestly, Glebe Farms should have trademarked PureOaty earlier, but maybe prevented from Pure Oaty. Oatly should have done two simple pass tests before contemplating this lawsuit, (A) ask 100 random consumers if they were confused between the wordmark Oatly and the brand name PureOaty for oat milk, (B) randomly ask 100 of Oatly most valued customers what would they think of Oatly as a company sued an SME who is using the word Oaty. If Glebe Farms had used the brand PureOatly, THEN Oatly would have an infringement case, then it would confuse consumers as to the manufacturer of the product. Same as ExtreamOatly, RealyOatly, NotOatly. Similar to Apple having the right to stop the use of an entity using ApplePhones, Apple Laptops, or Apple Technology in the electronic / software sector. Oatly, be wise here, say that you listened to your most valued stakeholders (consumers who buy your product), and since Oatly takes responsibility seriously then the company will withdraw the infringement claim against Glebe. Then that Oatly will defined it’s wordmark Oatly, used individually or in a combination of words, in any future case of possible infringement.
5•
149 w
@douglas_marett You have articulated it best for @oatly. They should stop arguing us by comparing the words OATLY & OATY. We all know that the brand name they are contesting with is Pureoaty i.e. Very different & unique.
2•
•
•
149 w
@douglas_marett Hi Douglas, thank you for your input. The trial ended on the 10th of June and a verdict is expected around mid July. We can't share everything from the case as it's still ongoing for the court, but if you're interested you can find claims and counterclaims here https://www.oatly.com/uk/oatly-vs-glebe-farm
2•
149 w
@oatly thank you for sharing the trail documents, I appreciate the level of transparency!
3
•
149 w
It's ridiculous that time and resources are being wasted on petty arguments like this when these smaller businesses could be teaming up for strength against climate change.
5•
149 w
Really sad to see what Oatly is doing. This is not righteous nor good for climate!
4•
149 w
Is it about taking market shares or should the focus be on increasing the market? This does not match up to the promise they give on their webpage "We promise to be a good company which means that our drive to help people upgrade their lives always comes before the reckless pursuit of profit."
7•
149 w
1. They look very very different. Could be differentiated from a mile! Oatly should withdraw the lawsuit. 2. I agree with Ingmar. @oatly should give us an answer that is good enough to keep us buying its products.
12•
149 w
Absolutely agree! A big part of Oatly’s success can be seen in the light of their huge marketing campaigns positioning them as underdogs against “big dairy”. Going from being bullied to bullying it seems. Not impressed. The product oat milk is super simply put water and oats. Get over yourselves.
14•
•
•
149 w
Hey Susanne! We will always work for a plant-based and sustainable food industry and take the fight with the dairy lobby if that's needed. Sometimes we do that together with other companies and we work as a team, all using their own unique voices and perspectives. We believe uniqueness and a willingness to contribute with at least as much as you get, is important within all teams. There is no bullying about this case. We had a disagreement and we tried to settle it through a polite discussion. Sometimes, like this time, the two sides are unable to work through their dispute and you need a third neutral party to examine the available facts and come to a conclusion, that is what the court is doing right now, and we’re expecting a verdict around the middle of June.
1
Welcome, let's solve the climate crisis together
Write or agree to climate reviews to make businesses and world leaders act. It’s easy and it works.
Write a climate review
Voice your opinion on how businesses and organizations impact the climate.
Open for Climate Dialogue™
Certified accounts actively looking for your opinion on their climate impact.
0 trees planted
One tree is planted for every climate review written to an organization that is Open for Climate Dialogue™.
Download the app
We plant a tree for every new user.
•
•
•
149 w