Mime-Version: |
1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed |
Date: |
Tue, 17 May 2005 11:42:56 -0500 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
<000801c55af3$e8a1d580$9216de18@apartment> |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Sender: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
> Actually, we beekeepers do not have a copyright on the word "honey",
> nice
> as that may sound at first hearing.
There is a vast difference between the term "copyright" and
"trademark". I believe that the national organization that promotes
milk, and the national organization that promotes beef, are reasonably
protective of the words "milk" and "beef". If I raised cattle, I would
be upset if someone marketed a product with "beef" in the name which
contained not a trace of beef.
I don't think that it is unreasonable for honey producers to be
similarly protective. It's not a black-and-white issue. If someone
wants to promote a honey sauce in which the primary ingredient is not
honey, I don't see a problem with that. But if they use the word
"honey" in their product description, the product should contain honey.
The liquid in the bottle of "honey" that I buy should not be colored
corn syrup.
I am ignorant on the complex rules regarding labeling. But if, as
reported to me, "Honey Baked Ham" contains not a trace of honey, that's
over my threshold of trying to deceive the public.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
|
|
|