Colgate sues GSK over toothpaste nurdle
This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet
Executive Summary
Anticipating an infringement lawsuit from GlaxoSmithKline regarding toothpaste trademarks, Colgate-Palmolive files a suit of its own, alleging "GSK desires to stifle competition in the marketplace through overbroad assertions of trademark rights." Colgate says in its complaint for declaratory relief filed July 29 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, that its Colgate brand toothpaste with a "Triple Action" claim and the image of a three-striped "nurdle" of toothpaste drew complaints from GSK, maker of Aquafresh products with a "Triple Protection" claim. The plaintiff asks that Glaxo's application for a three-striped, color-nonspecific nurdle trademark - "a blatant shot across Colgate's bow" - be found invalid and unenforceable. The toothpaste giants recently squared off in a self-regulatory arena when Colgate brought a challenge to the National Advertising Division regarding bacteria removal claims made by Aquafresh iso-active (1"The Rose Sheet" Feb. 22, 2010)
You may also be interested in...
Colgate Total Was Wrong Choice For Aquafresh Iso-Active Head-To-Head Trial
A National Advertising Division recommendation that GlaxoSmithKline discontinue the claim that Aquafresh Iso-Active Whitening Toothpaste "removes 3x more bacteria" than ordinary toothpaste is a significant blow to a campaign centered on the superiority of its "breakthrough" product
Fenty Cleanser Performance Claims Supported, But Influencer Videos Need Disclaimers – NAD
A National Advertising Division review of claims by LVMH-owned Fenty Skin determined makeup- and dirt-removal representations were substantiated by a study and subject questionnaire, but demo videos from paid endorsers must include disclosures about material connections in accordance with FTC guidelines.
Clinical Trial Diversity Requires Sponsors Work With An Assortment Of Patient Advocates, Community Organizations
US FDA oncology officials are concerned that the entities sponsors are consulting in developing and implementing clinical trial diversity plans are not sufficiently diverse themselves and do not represent patients in underserved communities.