Big Mayo Files Lawsuit Against Food-Tech Startup Hampton Creek
eatdrinkpolitics.comMayonnaise is oil, egg yolks, and an acid (typically vinegar or lemon juice). If you don't have these things, it's not mayonnaise.
It seems like it'd be pretty easy for them to call it "Vegan Mayo," where folks are assuming there's a major substitute for a core ingredient. "Just Mayo," on the other hand, seems to claim the opposite.
It's still pretty whiny for Hellmann's/Best Foods/Unilever/Whomever to file the lawsuit, but that doesn't mean they're wrong.
Technically speaking, mayonnaise is oil, an lecithin based emulsifier derived from egg yolks, and an acid (which may be vinegar, or mustard, or something else).
If you get a vegan emulsifier to work as good or better than eggs, then go ahead and call it the generic, unprotected "mayo"- because that's what it is, and that's how it will be used.
This blog post/article is a bit hyperbolic with the whole the dirty egg industry thing.
I disagree.
A hamburger is beef. People often call them "burgers" for short.
Vegan substitutes exist, but they are called "veggieburgers", "gardenburgers", or similar, not "burgers".
If you try to sell gardenburgers as "burgers", you're being misleading, and you're likely to run afoul of the law.
Whiny?
>Unilever is asking the court not only to make Hampton Creek stop using the Just Mayo name (and remove all current product from store shelves), but also to pay Unilever the amount obtained from profits, plus triple damages.
I do not understand how our legal system entitles Unilever to anything.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1125 and http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1117
First section says that someone using a misleading word or term "shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act." Second section says a winning plaintiff is entitled to profits, and up to treble damages.
Depends on which meaning of "Just" you use:
1. guided by truth, reason, justice, and fairness: We hope to be just in our understanding of such difficult situations.
2. exactly or precisely: This is just what I mean.
Neither are a lot of Hellmann’s products. Lots of their products are called "mayonnaise dressing" instead of "mayonnaise" probably because they don’t fit the criteria either. Do you care though? You probably never noticed, and just had a really nice sandwich.
The standard is actually super specific:
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRS...
for example you have to have at least 65% by weight oil and at least 2.5% acid.
If I buy something that has "mayonnaise" on it, then I’m buying "mayonnaise". If my sandwich sucks, then I won’t buy it again. No need for the government to tell me what is and isn’t mayonnaise.
"You probably never noticed, and just had a really nice sandwich."
Speak for yourself. When I buy spread for my sandwiches, I buy mayonnaise, not some ill-defined "spread". I'm sure I'm not the only one.
The entire point of labeling regulations is to prevent exactly this kind of misleading branding.
To me the true irony is that when it's some massive conglomerate labeling "pink slime" as meat, folks cry foul and demand government action. But when it's a sweetheart little startup being all "green" and "sustainable" while using similarly deceptive labeling (well, save that "pink slime" is at least a meat product whereas "Just Mayo" isn't mayo by any traditional definition), suddenly it's okay because they're the "good guys".
> No need for the government to tell me what is and isn’t mayonnaise.
If I need "mayonnaise" for a recipe that depends on the specific chemical properties of the stuff (as a metaphor, see chocolate), I want to be sure that the stuff I'm buying at the store is actually oil+acid+egg that won't break down unexpectedly in my cooking. So by all means, I want regulation that ensures that "mayonnaise" is reasonably close to the actual stuff, and not some recreation that just happens to mimic the original.
Which, of course, goes against Hampton Creek's marketing.
If I buy something that has mayonnaise on it then I'm expecting _mayonnaise_.
Fair enough, but if you buy a lot of the mayo products in the condiments aisle, the FDA doesn't think you're getting it. Check it out next time you're in the supermarket, lots of things are dressing and not mayonnaise, but I'll bet you never noticed or cared. I live with someone who's vegan so I've been paying a lot of attention to labels lately.
I feel like this is sort of the Turing test of food, given two jars, one FDA-approved and the other not. If you can't tell one from the other, aren't they both mayo?
In the extreme case, the answer is "no" - just because the flavor and texture are 'correct' doesn't mean the product is even safe. Back off from the extreme case of unsafe ingredients, and you're still not necessarily getting what was advertised. I think the question becomes "at what point should a particular formulation of a food product does it cease to be the original and start being something different."
There's a difference between "didn't check the label" and "can't check the label because the info isn't on it".
Yes, there are "salad dressings", "sandwich spreads", and the like in the condiment aisle.
No, they're not called "mayo".
Note that Hellman's/Best Foods biggest competitor, Kraft, makes both a mayonnaise ("Kraft Mayo") and a salad dressing ("Miracle Whip").
So it's called "Just Mayo," mayonnaise being a food product that contains eggs by definition, and has a picture of an egg on its label. But it isn't mayonnaise and doesn't contain eggs. Maybe the hipster irony is just lost on me.
As for the egg on the label, it's probably the idea of the plant growing into the empty place left by the removal of an egg, but the minimalist color scheme makes that kind of confusing (hard to imply negative space when all shapes are a different color pasted onto cardboard.
But yeah, it isn't mayo. Might work like mayo, but it ain't mayo. If they just put something on the packaging that says it isn't mayo, that'd probably be good enough?
I'd be more concerned about the lack of sustainability in the other half of a tuna salad sandwich
It's a picture of an egg with a plant growing inside of it. I don't really know how much clearer the iconography could actually be. It's mayo, but with some plant product instead of chicken eggs. Were you really deceived, or are you playing devil's advocate? (Edit: parent edited his post, it no longer says "deceptive marketing at its best.")
I agree that "mayo" is generally considered to be synonymous with "mayonnaise" and that mayonnaise has a precise definition in the law, but neither of these are a trademark. The law doesn't define "mayo." It defines mayonnaise.
It's not clear to me if the standards of "confusingly similar" still apply in cases outside of trademark. I know this is a standard in trademark. It's not like they're marketing a non-dairy "malk", which is obviously OK.
Maybe they should change the product name to "Nellman's" and they would be better off. I went looking for any brand of Mayonnaise that markets itself as just "Mayo" and didn't find one.
To me, that logo looks like a perfect logo for real mayonnaise: it contains the two main ingredients: an egg + a plant representing the oil.
That label is definitely misleading, and probably intentionally so.
Seriously, it features an egg, which it doesn't have.
I doubt it was intentionally so. Everything seems painfully obvious in hindsight.
Upvoted for "big mayo" reference, but this is a pretty obvious case of severe editorial slant.
> Now it’s true that FDA’s "standard of identity" (i.e., definition) for mayonnaise includes eggs; well specifically, "egg yolk-containing ingredients"
Okay. Case closed. It's not Mayo.
> Okay. Case closed. It's not Mayo.
Well, that means it's not mayonnaise. But if they call themselves "mayo" (which doesn't have a standard of identity), and never "mayonnaise", I'm not so sure it's as clear that it's not Mayo.
I think the point is not whether it fits the current standard but whether those standards make sense in an age of innovation.
I think consumers are smart enough to figure out whether or not the product they bought is mayonnaise. If it tastes like mayo, works like mayonnaise, smells like mayonnaise, is it not mayonnaise? Who cares if it has eggs, and why are the Feds getting involved anyway?
> I think the point is not whether it fits the current standard but whether those standards make sense in an age of innovation.
How does an "age of innovation" benefit from inaccurate product labeling. Its not like mayonnaise-substitutes that vary from the defining ingredients are new -- usually with branding that is evocative of mayonnaise without claiming to be mayonnaise, clearly indicating that it is: (1) something different than mayonnaise, (2) intended to fill the role of mayonnaise.
> Who cares if it has eggs, and why are the Feds getting involved anyway?
The Feds are concerned about accurate and meaningful food labeling because people being able to rely on food labels and no what they mean is important for both health and safety reasons, and for the ability of consumers to make informed decisions in the marketplace.
Misleading labeling benefits only fraudsters.
Just Mayo
>INGREDIENTS: Non-GMO Expeller Pressed Canola Oil, Filtered Water, Lemon Juice, White Vinegar, 2% or less of the following: Organic Sugar, Salt, Pea Protein, Spices, Modified Food Starch, Beta-Carotene.*
Hellman's Mayonnaise
>SOYBEAN OIL, WATER, WHOLE EGGS AND EGG YOLKS, VINEGAR, SALT, SUGAR, LEMON JUICE, CALCIUM DISODIUM EDTA (USED TO PROTECT QUALITY), NATURAL FLAVORS. GLUTEN-FREE.
I don't see any misleading labeling here.
So no doubt the people behind Just Mayo are cool with unlabeled GMO products, right?
After all, if it tastes the same, works the same, smells the same...
Age of innovation!
Disclaimer- I'm fine with most GMO, though I see no reason not to label it as such.
Eh, I'd argue the age of innovation for foods started 25 years ago, when we figured out how to make chocolate tasting things without much chocolate, and maple-flavored corn syrup. You can't call that chocolate or maple syrup, so I don't see how mayo is any different.
I believe the correct term for these products is "egg-free mayonnaise-like spread". Mayo*, if you will.
Anything can be a spread. Think that's jam? No! Fruit spread.
Miracle Whip manages to sell in huge quantities without calling themselves "Mayo". If Miracle Whip can do it, so can Hampton Creek.
Exactly.
I noted above that Kraft also makes a real mayonnaise, which they call "Kraft Mayo".
I'm surprised they're not right in there with Unilever complaining about this.
I think the biggest weakness in the complaint is that they have to argue that the shorthand "mayo" is the same as the protected term "mayonnaise," and is controlled by the same rules. The fact that they use dictionary definitions to make that case, rather than federal code, is rather telling.
Consider that "chocolaty" is considered a valid workaround for "chocolate", but the dictionary for "chocolaty" says "made of or like chocolate."
Shelf stable mayo is disgusting. Make it at home and compare. None of these companies should be able to call their product mayo. Sure they meet the technical definition of mayo, having at least the ingredients that whafro lists, but they also contain a bunch of other crap that significantly alters the texture and flavor. Just Mayo does seem to be even further from real mayo than most of the competition.
I don't see what the big hubub is about. Hellman can pursue all three strategies to win at the same time. Innovate, market, AND sue! Not to defend the system but it's the one we have and I don't blame them for taking advantage of it.
How about "I can't believe it's not mayo"?
I'm getting a 500 Internal Service Error
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http:/...
The Pot calling the kettle black.
Traditional Mayonnaise used olive oil, most companies use soybean oil now for it's preservative properties and low price. I can't buy a 100% olive oil mayo, but Hellman's gets to cry about eggs?
Rename it to Almost Mayo, and they've got no problems!