Does anyone remember McDonald's coming out with some Happy Meal toys last year that were "American Idol" inspired? Apparently the toys were meant to represent musical genres, with named like Disco Dave and Rockin' Riley. I don't, but Devo was certainly aware of it.

According to Rolling Stone's music blog, Rock and Roll Daily, the 80's new wave band is suing the fast food giant because one of the toys, New Wave Nigel, is looks incredibly similar to what the band looked like in the early 1980's right down to the red hat. That wouldn't be a problem, except Devo had the hat, called the energy dome, copyrighted and trade marked.

According to Devo, they were never approached by McDonald's, and they are quite upset about it. I can't wait to hear about what happens next.

There is a huge piracy problem in China. Lots of western companies find that they can't sell their product in China because there is already a Chinese clone of the product. This was a big problem for Ferrero Rocher, that is until recently.

The chocolate maker just won a long-fought lawsuit in China's Supreme Court against a Chinese company that copied Ferrero Rocher's famous, gold wrapped pralines. Montresor, the Chinese chocolate maker that was copying Ferrero Rocher, was ordered not only to stop but also to pay a token fine of €50,000.

A lot of people see this as welcome news. It could mean that China may be ready to adopt more fair marketing practices. I am all for local competition to global brands, but I think a copy cat company shouldn't be allowed to just piggy back on a famous product. The name brand put a lot of work into the brand that they've built. Like it or hate it, I think a company should profit on its own merits. Good luck, Ferrero Rocher.

You had to know it was only a matter of time before this happened. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has filed a lawsuit against Coca-Cola and Nestlé for weight-loss claims and labeling of their latest product, Enviga. As Sarah wrote back in October, the sparkling green tea has been marketed as having "negative calories" and is labeled as "the calorie burner".

CSPI's mission is to protect consumers by stopping deceptive advertising and labeling of products. The non-profit organization had their team of scientists review the claims made by Enviga and responded by saying the product is a "highly caffeinated and over-priced diet soda, and is exactly the kind of faddy, phony diet aid it claims not to be."

Have any of you tried Enviga? Would this news cause you to stop drinking it, or do you believe in (or have seen results of) the product's ability to actually burn calories?

The words "all natural" on the packaging of Capri Sun juice drinks have prompted a Florida woman to file a lawsuit against Kraft Foods, Inc., the drink's producer, the Associated Press reported. Assisted by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Linda Rex of Boynton Beach, Fla., claims that the inclusion of high fructose corn syrup is what makes the drink in the little silver pouch less than "all natural." You might remember the CSPI from when they filed and then withdrew lawsuits against Kentucky Fried Chicken over trans-fat use last year, or for their similar actions against Starbucks. A recent press release from CSPI points out that the organization has also challenged 7UP's use of the word "natural." A statement from Kraft says that the "all natural" label was already on the way out and will soon be replaced with packaging that claims "no artificial colors, flavors or preservatives,'' the AP reported. CSPI's always-witty executive director Michael Jacobson, coiner of phrases such as "venti-sized health problems" and "Kentucky Fried coronary," said HCFS "would more accurately be called 'Fresh from the Factory.'"

Now I've heard everything.

A woman in Los Angeles is suing Kraft Foods because the avocado dip she bought wasn't really guacamole. Or, in her exact words, "it didn't taste avocadoey." She's seeking damages and wants to force Kraft from calling the dip "guacamole." Kraft says that they aren't deceiving anyone because the labels list the ingredients. However, they have decided to change the labels, to point out a little bit clearer that the dip is only "guacamole-flavored." Hmmm...should they change before the lawsuit is brought to a judge? Isn't that sort of admitting at least a little guilt, that you can see their point and you're changing the label? (I'm probably wrong on that. All I know about law is what I get watching reruns of Ed.)

I hate when my guacamole isn't "avocadoey" enough. It's the same thing when I get a Caesar's salad and it's not anchoviriffic, or when I buy banana bread and it's not bananatastic.

[via Obscure Store and Reading Room]

An Indianapolis couple, Michael and Alexis Brennan, is suing Starbucks, claiming that they served their daughter a cup of hot chocolate, which subsequently spilled and left her with serious burns. The daughter, whose age was not given, but was young enough to fit in a car seat, was said to have been riding strapped into that car seat in the back of the car when she spilled the drink. The mother stopped the car and got out to discover that the "skin on [her] leg was falling off of her."

Starbucks is supposed to serve their kids sized drinks at about 20 degrees less than their standard temperature, putting those drinks at about 140F or so, which is hot, but not incredibly so when you consider the size of the cup and the fact that they are often topped with an inch or more of cold whipped cream, as this particular drink was. The baristas can make it at a lower temperature if requested. A high percentage of parents test the temperature of their kids' drinks by taking a sip themselves, but Ms. Brennan only subjected the drink to a visual inspection before handing it to her daughter. A small child holding a drink of any kind in the backseat of a moving car, especially if he or she is small enough to have to be confined to a car seat, sounds like a recipe for disaster, regardless of whether the drink is hot or not. The parents are, of course, seeking (unspecified) damages.

In Washington DC, a group of 10 consumers have filed a lawsuit on behalf of all the citizens in the district who are lactose intolerant and don't know it. They are demanding that the defendants in the case, which include supermarkets like Safeway, put warning labels on milk cartons, stating that milk could cause health problems in people who are lactose intolerant.

This seems fairly obvious, but the plaintiffs insist that most people don't know that they are lactose intolerant - the onset is gradual and can occur any time in life - and continue to experience negative side effects from the ingestion of dairy.

Fortunately for dairy producers, sellers and even milk drinkers, their case brought an unfavorable ruling by the US District Court that heard it, though the group plans to appeal. Dairy producers seem to think that labels would hurt sales, but if people are not put off by experiencing negative side effects such as abdominal pain and other gastrointestinal disturbances, it doesn't seem all that likely that most consumers would alter their buying habits when it comes to milk.

The UK's Evening Standard newspaper claimed that parts of one of celebrity chef Gordon Ramsey's shows were faked. Specifically, they made accusations that the restaurant kitchens pictured on Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares were actually normal kitchens, up to code, that were made to look like the "health hazards" that Ramsay said they were. The paper also speculated that Ramsey had resorted to other tricks to make the kitchens he was supposed to be renovating appear to be poorly run.

Ramsey sued, accusing the paper of libel and falsely defaming him. And he won.

With their claims proven to be untrue in a court of law, the Standard has agreed to pay $138,000 to Ramsey in damages and to publish a public apology in the paper.  Ramsey said, "I won't let people write anything they want to about me. Even I have limits and on this occasion the line was crossed."

KFC has come under fire from a retired Maryland doctor and, for a second time, the Center for Science in the Public Interest for their continued use of partially hydrogenated oil, the Associated Press reported. Aside from financial compensation, the two are asking that a judge require KFC to either stop using the high-fat oils or require employees to inform customers of trans fats prior to ordering. Class action status is also being sought for anyone that has eaten at a certain Washington, D.C. KFC in 2004-2005.

Now, I suppose you can argue that fast food chains should take steps to make their products healthier, but this is fried chicken. Next to maybe a chili dog or a Krispy Kreme donut, I don't think anything says "I"m throwing nutritional caution to the wind right now" like a piece of fried chicken, let alone a bucket of it.

A KFC spokesperson told the AP that KFC will fight the suit in court, adding that the chain has made their nutrition information available in stores and online "for a very long time."

[Via Restaurant News Resource]

Cadbury Giant Fingers, a chocolate confection, have recently been under scrutiny for deceptive packaging, having been brought to court in England by an irate customer. He claimed that it was "fraudulent to suggest is bigger than it actually is." And, even more astonishingly, the court agreed and the company producing these candies (under license from Cadbury) was fined a total of £5,000, plus an additional £2,000 in costs.

If this guy thinks that the packaging for the Cadbury candies is bad, I have a couple of bags of potato chips that I think he should see. If he was shocked by the size of the Giant Fingers' packaging, clearly he doesn't spend much time at the grocery store. 

[Image Telegraph.co.uk]

Some of you may recall a post last month about a pending lawsuit filed against PepsiCo by Glaceau, makers of vitaminwater. Glaceau claimed that PepsiCo's new SoBe Life Water (left) too closely copied their own vitaminwater (right) in it's trade dress, which included the label, bottle and clear plastic cap. Last week, PepsiCo agreed to change the packaging of Life Water in a settlement reached in a New York federal court. The terms of the settlement remained confidential. Glaceau had also initially complained that the ingredients of Life Water too closely mimicked those in vitaminwater, but reports on the settlement haven't mentioned any changes aside from packaging. BevNET and Yahoo! have more.

Looking at the two bottles to the right, it comes as little surprise that the makers of Glaceau's vitaminwater (right) have filed a suit against PepsiCo for their new SoBe Lifewater (left). According to a recent article on BevNET, Glaceau claims that Pepsico's Lifewater copied their flavorings and ingredients, including a sweetener never before used in any PepsiCo product until now. The Washington Post has more about the dueling nutrient-infused waters.

[Photos: BevNET]

The company that makes Marshmallow Fluff brand marshmallow creme is suing Williams-Sonoma over its use of the word "fluffernutter". A fluffernutter is a combination of marshmallow creme and peanut butter and the "fluff " part of the trademarked name comes from the Marshmallow Fluff brand name. Williams-Sonoma sells a marshmallow and peanut butter chocolate-covered candy under the same name. The products were available over the 2005 Holiday season and do not seem to be in stores at the moment.

Two Florida families have now filed suits against McDonald's after the fast food giant recently admitted to seasoning its French fries with dairy and gluten products. According to the Sun-Sentinel, one suit comes from a Coral Springs family of an autistic girl on a gluten-free diet. Some believe that gluten-free diets can help curb the effects of autism. Another suit was filed by the parents of girl suffering from celiac disease, a disorder involving the inability to process gluten. The Coral Springs family hopes that the $5 million in damages sought in the suit will be used for research into autism and celiac disease, their lawyer said. A similar suit was filed in California last month.

As you may have heard, McDonald's recently disclosed that their French fries contain ingredients derived from wheat and dairy. While the announcement was presented as an immediate concern for allergy sufferers, it was also a concern to vegans. A Los Angeles woman is now suing the fast food giant on behalf of all California McDonald's customers that avoid said ingredients for moral or health reasons. She is asking McDonald's reimburse any of the misled fry buyers of the last four years. McDonald's has yet to comment.