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 2025

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

Price hikes at ‘big law’ firms are pushing some clients toward boutiques that offer predictable fees, specialised expertise, and a model built around prioritising IP
The Australian side, in particular, can benefit by capitalising on its independent status to bring in more work from Western countries while still working with its former Chinese partner
Koen Bijvank of Brinkhof and Johannes Heselberger of Bardehle Pagenberg discuss the Amgen v Sanofi case and why it will be cited frequently
View the official winners of the 2025 Social Impact EMEA Awards
King & Wood Mallesons will break into two entities, 14 years after a merger between a Chinese and an Australian firm created the combined outfit
Teams from Shakespeare Martineau and DWF will take centre stage in a dispute concerning the registrability of dairy terminology in plant-based products
Senem Kayahan, attorney and founder at PatentSe, discusses how she divides prosecution tasks, and reveals the importance of empathetic client advice
The association’s Australian group has filed a formal complaint against the choice of venue, citing Dubai as an unsafe environment for the LGBTQIA+ community
Firm says appointment of Nick McDonald will boost its expertise in cross-border disputes, including at the Unified Patent Court
In the final episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss the IP Inclusive Charter and the senior leaders’ pledge
Gift this article