Over a year after the law suit was filed by P&G, the two companies have agreed to a consent judgement regarding the manufacturing and distribution of a supposed look-a-like product based on the P&G’s Olay Regenerist line.
Patent and trade dress infringements
In December 2007, the Cincinnati-based company accused Fruit of the Earth of manufacturing products that infringed three P&G patents, as well as a trade dress infringement of the product line’s packaging.
P&G demanded the company stop distributing the products and that all stocks were impounded or returned by retailers.
The company said that copy packaging was likely to mislead consumers, as well as allowing Fruit of the Earth to trade its skin care line on the back of 'years of effort and expense' on the part of P&G to develop and market these products.
"We believe this is a case of clear infringement designed to take advantage of consumer goodwill and business growth that P&G developed through its patented innovation on the Olay brand," said Jim Johnson, P&G chief legal officer, when the lawsuit was filed.
This week’s judgement has seen Fruit of the Earth recognising the validity of P&G’s rights in the Olay Regenerist trade dress, as well as a number of the patent rights involved in the lawsuit.
As a consequence, the company has agreed to revise its product range.
Further details of the agreement were not disclosed.
Forced to change sun care packaging
This is not the first time the Texas-based company has been required to change its product offering following legal action.
In June 2008 Fruit of the Earth was ordered to change the packaging of its sport and baby sunscreens to protect the trade dress of Coppertone sun care products.
Schering-Plough brought the accusations to court as it felt that the distinctiveness of its Coppertone brand had been compromised.