Eggshells and private labels

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Eggshells and private labels

Brand owners and retailers have developed a unique rapport when it comes to private labels.

“It’s one of the most interesting relationships I’ve ever observed,” said Johnson & Johnson’s Jake D. Feldman, who moderated a panel on the topic yesterday. “Not only are they our customers, but they’re also our competitors.”

In what Feldman described as an “eggshell” relationship, the parties occasionally clash. Retailers must ensure their store brands don’t too closely resemble national brands. Often, they occupy the same shelves in stores. 

Andrew M. Solomon, associate general counsel of manufacturer Perrigo, said the company conducts extensive research to avoid disputes or, when responding to claims of infringement, defend its position. Perrigo develops, manufactures and distributes over-the-counter drugs and infant formula to stores like Target and Walmart. “We don’t want people buying Target store brands thinking they’re buying Johnson & Johnson products,” he told the crowd. 

“That’s interesting,” Feldman said, eliciting laughter from the audience. “I wonder if many brand owners think the same way.”


The panel also looked at McNeil Nutritionals v. Heartland Sweeteners, a recent case in which McNeil alleged Heartland’s private-label artificial sweetener’s packaging was too similar to Splenda’s. The Third Circuit ruled that while private label manufacturers could develop packaging somewhat similar to those of branded products, they could not produce trade dress that is essentially a duplicate but for a “tiny differentiating label.”

“This case affirms trade dress packaging as protectable,” said James D. Weinberger of Fross, Zelnick, Lehrman & Zissu. “It gives brand owners real direction about what kinds of things you can use on products and things you can’t.”

Still, Weinberger criticized the “broad general statements” the Third Circuit made regarding clarity on product source. “If I were a brand owner, I would not be deterred to pursue a case,” he said.

Feldman also cautioned private-label manufacturers and retailers from taking too much comfort in the decision. “I don’t think it’s completely clear,” he told attendees. “I don’t think this case is as helpful as a definitive case on private labels.”     

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

While IP Australia’s updated manual could be favourable to computer-implemented inventions, stakeholders would like to see whether a consistent and reliable standard is followed during actual examination
UKIPO will remain a competitive option as long as efficient service continues
A future opt-out has not been ruled out, but practitioners warn that the UK could fall behind in the AI race
US patent lawyers say they are increasingly advising clients on China strategies as corporations seek to gain leverage in enforcement, licensing, and supply chain management
Mike Rueckheim reunites with 12 of his former Winston & Strawn colleagues as King & Spalding continues aggressive hiring streak
As global commerce continues to expand through e-commerce platforms and digital marketplaces, protecting brands has become a growing challenge for organisations worldwide. Counterfeiting, intellectual property infringement, and online brand abuse are increasing across industries, making brand protection strategies a critical priority for businesses.
Henrik Holzapfel and Chuck Larsen of McDermott Will & Schulte explain why a Court of Appeal ruling could promote access to justice and present a growth opportunity for litigation finance
A co-partner in charge says the UK prosecution teams are a ‘vital’ part of the firm’s offering, while praising a key injunction win
A team from White & Case has checked in on behalf of Premier Inn Hotels in a UK trademark and passing off case against a cookie brand
Litigation team says pre-trial work and a Section 101 defence helped significantly limit damages payable by ride-sharing firm Lyft in patent case
Gift this article