Intangiblia™
Plain talk about Intellectual Property. Podcast of Intangible Law™
Intangiblia™
Leaf Me Alone: Green or Greenish Trademarks
Behind every "planet-positive" product wrapped in plastic lies the fascinating paradox of greenwashing—where marketing promises grow faster than bamboo but stand on foundations about as sturdy as a soggy paper straw. Welcome to the messy jungle of environmental branding, where not everything labeled clean actually is.
Greenwashing represents the dangerous intersection where trademark law meets environmental claims. Companies build entire brand identities around sustainability without the substance to back them up. However, regulators worldwide are fighting back. The FTC's Green Guides in the US, the EU's Green Claims Directive, and similar regulations globally are creating serious consequences for hollow eco-promises.
The casualties of this crackdown are numerous and notable. Volkswagen's "Clean Diesel" campaign resulted in $30 billion in fines when emissions-cheating devices were discovered. H&M's "Conscious Collection" faced lawsuits for being mostly fast fashion with minimal sustainable materials. Coca-Cola promotes recycling while consistently ranking as the world's top plastic polluter. Even financial giants like Goldman Sachs have paid millions for overstating the sustainability of their ESG funds.
The distinction between legitimate certification marks (like Forest Stewardship Council or Energy Star) and self-created eco-labels has become a crucial battleground. When SC Johnson invented its own "GreenList" logo, consumers assumed third-party verification that didn't exist. The resulting lawsuit demonstrates how sustainability can't be fabricated through clever branding alone.
For those navigating these green waters, specificity and transparency offer the safest passage. Vague terms like "eco-friendly" invite scrutiny, while precise statements backed by evidence build lasting trust. As trademark lawyers, marketers and entrepreneurs, our challenge is clear: align intellectual property with genuine sustainability, not just environmental aesthetics.
Ready to sharpen your eco-radar and spot corporate green shenanigans? Subscribe now and join us in exploring how intellectual property shapes our world—from the products we buy to the promises we believe. Because in both IP and sustainability, authenticity always outlasts imitation.
Have you ever stared at a bottle of shampoo that promised it was planet positive, had a leaf logo, a whisper of mint and the soul of a glacier and guess what? It still came wrapped in plastic thicker than my sarcasm. This, my friends, is the infamous practice of greenwashing, where claims grow faster than bamboo and are about as sturdy as a soggy paper straw. Consumers push for better, more sustainable products. Some brands hold the promise, others resort to creative, almost fraudulent approaches. Welcome to the messy jungle of green branding, where not everything labeled clean is actually clean.
Speaker 2:You are listening to Intangiblia, the podcast of intangible law playing talk about intellectual property, Please welcome your host, leticia Caminero.
Speaker 3:Intangiblia, the podcast where we explore intellectual property through the lens of culture, technology and a touch of storytelling. Today's topic is inspired by my upcoming participation in the inter-annual meeting in San Diego, where I'll be moderating a table topic titled Greenish Identifying and Addressing Greenwashing Tactics. If you're attending, join me on May 17 from 1-3 pm. I'm your host, leticia Caminero, and joining me, as always, is my AI co-host, fliq Cloud Ponhot Stahl. Indigital Green and Certified. 99.9% Opinionated.
Speaker 1:Sustainably packaged sarcasm included. And before we dive into the compost heap of corporate claims, this episode was made using AI tools, including yours truly. I may not breathe air, but I can definitely stir it up like a reasonable straw in a greenwash smoothie.
Speaker 3:So today we're diving into a topic that has more layers than an overpriced ecolinian. Greenwashing is when companies make themselves look more environmentally friendly than they really are.
Speaker 1:It's like putting a fig leaf over a smokestack. Just because your laundry detergent has a dolphin high-fiving a sunflower on the label doesn't mean it's saving the oceans.
Speaker 3:And that's where trademarks come in. A logo, a slogan, even a brand name can make environmental promises, but what happens when those promises are hollow?
Speaker 1:You get consumer deception, regulatory backlash and, in some cases, billion dollar fines.
Speaker 3:Or worse, you lose the public's trust and in the age of climate awareness, that trust is gold or green gold, depending on your branding. Take Patagonia they didn't just slap a mountain on a hoodie and call it a day. Their entire brand and trademark portfolio is built on consistent, transparent and verifiable sustainability.
Speaker 1:They even encourage you to buy less of their stuff. That's commitment, also probably why they're not getting sued left and right like some others we're about to talk about.
Speaker 3:Now let's zoom out Around the world. Regulators are stepping out to combat greenwashing.
Speaker 1:In the US there is the FTC Green Guides. They tell brands how to talk green without being shady. Think of them as a sustainability language tutor for marketers.
Speaker 3:Over in the EU, it gets even stricter. The Green Claims Directive aims to ban vague terms like eco-friendly or sustainable unless companies can prove it with solid scientific evidence.
Speaker 1:So no more carbon neutral-ish or recyclable, if you squint really hard, nonsense.
Speaker 3:The UK Advertising Standards Authority has also banned ads that overstate environmental benefits, and in places like Chile and India, green regulations are quickly evolving quickly evolving.
Speaker 1:Basically, the world is waking up to the fact that if your trademark is making green promises, those promises better be compostable and defensible.
Speaker 3:Shall we play a little game of name that green blunder? Oh, please, this is my moment. First up, volkswagen and its infamous clean diesel. Partly in Adamity 2010s, volkswagen marketed its TDI diesel engines as a cleaner, greener alternative to traditional fuel options. They used the phrase clean diesel as part of the advertising, appealing to environmentally conscious drivers, especially in the US market. But under the hood.
Speaker 1:They secretly installed defeat devices software that could detect when a car was being tested and reduce emissions temporarily to pass. In real world, driving those same cars emitted up to 40 times the legal limit of nitrogen oxides.
Speaker 3:When the truth came out in 2015,. It wasn't just a PR disaster. Truth came out in 2015. It wasn't just a PR disaster. Volkswagen faced over $30 billion per zero cents in fines, recalls and settlements worldwide. The brand's green claim collapsed under the weight of fraud.
Speaker 1:Which is why we call it Dieselgate. The emissions were dirty, and so was the strategy.
Speaker 3:Next up Fiat Chrysler. They weren't far behind with their EcoDiesel branding, especially for Jeep and Ram trucks. The name alone implied low emissions and high fuel efficiency.
Speaker 1:But the US Environmental Protection Agency found similar defeat devices. The emissions didn't match the marketing. In 2019, fiat Chrysler paid nearly $800 million zero cents in penalties and recalls the term. Ecodiesel became a textbook example of trademark greenwashing.
Speaker 3:Coca-Cola also got some heat for its World Without Waste campaign. They pledged to recycle every bottle by 2030, framing the initiative as a major sustainability effort.
Speaker 1:Meanwhile, year after year, coca-cola was ranked the one plastic polluter globally. Their marketing focused on the future, but their present actions told a different story. In 2021, earth Island Institute sued them for deceptive advertising. That case is still pending, but it's pushed scrutiny onto big beverage brands, claiming to be part of the solution.
Speaker 3:Nestle followed a similar pattern. They claimed their packaging was recyclable, but many of their products weren't being recycled due to lack of infrastructure.
Speaker 1:If a plastic wrapper technically can be recycled but never is, is it really recyclable in a meaningful way? That's the heart of the legal debate.
Speaker 3:Let's talk fashion. H&m's Conscious Collection launched with eco-buzzwords and soft green visuals suggesting a more sustainable line of clothing.
Speaker 1:In reality, only a small fraction of materials were actually organic or recycled. The rest was business as usual. Norway's consumer watchdog criticized the lack of clarity and H&M eventually faced a US class action lawsuit. The case highlighted how tricky and risky it is to label fast fashion as green.
Speaker 3:The financial world wasn't exempt. Goldman Sachs marketed ESG environmental, social governance investment funds as highly sustainable.
Speaker 1:But regulators found they weren't consistently applying ESG criteria across the board. In 2022, the US SEC fined Goldman $4 million zero cents. It was one of the first enforcement actions for greenwashing and finance.
Speaker 2:You are listening to Intangiblia, the podcast of intangible law playing talk about intellectual property.
Speaker 3:And finally, in France, Decathlon and Sephora faced the country's first greenwashing fines under new environmental marketing rules. Both brands used terms like climate neutral and carbon neutral without clear proof or substantiation.
Speaker 1:They relied on offsets and incomplete accounting, something the French authorities weren't buying. Decathlon paid 300,000 euro zero cents and Sepor 50 euro zero cents A bold reminder that vague claims come with very real consequences.
Speaker 3:These cases show that sustainability is not just a branding tool. It's a legal commitment.
Speaker 1:And if you don't back it up, the backlash will be more intense than a compost bin left in the sun.
Speaker 3:Let's clear something up there's a difference between a brand claiming it's sustainable and getting certified by someone else. This is where certification marks come in. They're not just a decoration. They are powerful tools to signal verified, measurable sustainability.
Speaker 1:Unlike a cute green leaf icon someone made in PowerPoint, these marks have real meaning. They require audits, compliance and transparency.
Speaker 3:Take the Forest Stewardship Council, fsc. When you see that logo on wood or paper, you know it came from responsibly managed forests. Fsc has global standards to protect biodiversity, indigenous rights and forest health. Not a branding gimmick, it's an ecosystem safeguard.
Speaker 1:Or Energy Star, which is backed by the US EPA. That label tells you the product meets energy efficiency standards, saves you money and emissions. It's one of the most recognized eco-certification systems in the world.
Speaker 3:And then there's the Rainforest Alliance Certified Amp You've probably seen the little green frog on coffee or chocolate. That still ensures sustainable agriculture, fair wages and reduced pesticide use. It's about protecting rainforests and the people who live and work there.
Speaker 1:And don't forget dolphins safe for tuna. It guarantees the product was caught using methods that don't harm dolphins. No shady nets, no shady marketing.
Speaker 3:These marks are governed by certification bodies, not just the brands themselves. That's a big legal difference.
Speaker 1:If you're a brand, use them right or don't use them at all. And if you're making your own version, like SC Johnson did with GreenList, brace yourself, Because if it's not third-party verified, it might just be third-rate truth.
Speaker 3:If it's not third party verified. It might just be third rate truth Trademarks reflect your brand's identity. Certification marks validate your practices. Confuse the two and you're cruising for regulatory bruising.
Speaker 1:Like FSC for forest products or Energy Star for appliances. Those are certification marks.
Speaker 3:Trademarks, on the other hand, reflect brand identity, but they can cross into dangerous territory when they imply third party credibility.
Speaker 1:Like inventing your own eco-approved leaf logo and pasting it on everything. Sc Johnson did that with its now infamous Green List logo. The leaf-shaped symbol appeared on products like Windex, suggesting an eco-certification. But in reality Green List wasn't a third-party program at all. It was SC Johnson's own internal system no independent verification, no regulatory backing. Consumers assumed it meant a product had been reviewed and approved by an outside sustainability authority, when really it was more of a marketing invention than a verified green standard. The fallout A class action lawsuit accusing the company of misleading environmental marketing. Eventually, sc Johnson removed the Green List logo and reworked its messaging to avoid further legal and reputational damage.
Speaker 3:If you're making up your own badge of honor. You better be ready for a legal dishonor. Now for the helpful part. If you're a trademark lawyer, marketing lead or eco-conscious entrepreneur, here's how you keep it clean and clever.
Speaker 1:Tip one think before you. Trademark Words like green, eco and carbon neutral are descriptive and sometimes even deceptive.
Speaker 3:If your product doesn't meet the hype, your mark may be refused. Worse, you could get sued under consumer protection laws.
Speaker 1:Tip two be specific Made with 60% recycled materials is solid earth friendly. What does that even mean? Friendly like a bear? Or friendly like an email that says per my last message.
Speaker 3:Tip three use disclaimers. Transparency is your best defense.
Speaker 1:Don't even think about making up your own certification logos unless you're ready to be roasted harder than unsustainable coffee beans.
Speaker 3:Tip four monitor the market. Four monitor the market. If competitors are using dubious green claims, call it out. You can challenge misleading trademarks or pursue false advertising claims.
Speaker 1:And finally, tip five, align your IP with actual sustainability strategy, Not vibes, not trends, not green colored dreams reality, because in IP as in life, it's not about looking green, it's about being green. And remember, consumers are smart, regulators are watching and I'm here to fact check your leaf emojis.
Speaker 3:That's a wrap on today's episode of Intangiblia. If you came for a podcast and left with a sharper eye for corporate green shenanigans, we've done our job.
Speaker 1:And if you're walking away ready to decode every leaf, globe and earthy buzzword slapped on a product, then congratulations, your eco radar just leveled up.
Speaker 3:Thank you for joining us on this journey through the jungle of branding, where trademarks meet pre-hugging claims and not all of them survive the scrutiny.
Speaker 1:If you loved it, send it to someone who calls their plastic bottle compostable, and if you didn't, hey, at least we didn't try to trademark clean vibes.
Speaker 3:Until next time, keep your legal toolkit sharp, your IP aligned with real values and your sustainability claims grounded, and if someone tries to greenwash their way into your feed, you know who to call.
Speaker 1:I'll bring the mic, you bring the magnifying glass. Go green, nafa Greenes.
Speaker 2:Thank you for listening to Intangiblia, the podcast of intangible law playing. Talk about intellectual property. Did you like what we talked today? Please share with your network. Do you want to learn more about intellectual property? Subscribe now on your favorite podcast player. Follow us on Instagram, facebook, linkedin and Twitter. Visit our website wwwintangibliacom. Copyright Leticia Caminero 2020. All rights reserved. This podcast is provided for information purposes only.