MillerCoors sued for marketing Blue Moon as craft

Brewer's Friend 728
Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Really, who cares if they call it craft? Is there an official/legal definition for craft beer? MillerCoors will not lose this suit.
 
wi_brewer said:
Really, who cares if they call it craft? Is there an official/legal definition for craft beer? MillerCoors will not lose this suit.
Click to expand...

Well, they aren't calling it craft. It is being *marketed* as a craft beer. No where on the label, anywhere, do you see that its a Miller/Coors product. That to me *is* a problem. I love Blue Moon, to the point that most of other craft wits and such I don't like as much as I like Blue Moon (nothing beats a cold blue moon 16oz can on a kayak on the lake on a hot day).

The labels really should display who the parent company is. Owned by New Glarus, you can see on all their labels "Oh it's a New Glarus beer brewed by New Glarus Brewery". Blue Moon "Hmm, Blue Moon, this must be brewed by Blue Moon Brewery in uh, somewhere, looks like craft and it doesn't say BMC on the label so it must be a craft beer". If the label said in no uncertain terms "This beer is a MillerCoors product" SOMEWHERE on the label, then people have no excuse to say "oh its marketed as a craft product", without that its completely reasonable mistake to assume its a craft beer.

Edit: Also what chewse posted, theres a legal definition of what a craft beer is, and isnt.
 
Yes, but that's the Brewer's Association's take on the word... I don't think there is any "official" term for craft beer as recognized by the TTB or any other entity that would actually matter in this argument.

Was it "crafted?" Sure was.
 
I don't get it. How is the guy being harmed? Did the beer start tasting differently once he found out that it was brewed by MillerCoors? Does the fact that it is produced by a large company automatically mean they should charge less for it?

Seems that a self-proclaimed "beer aficionado" would have been able to tell the difference between a microbrew and macrobrew anyway.
 
cmoewes said:
Oh my. I don't think the Brewers Association's definition of "craft beer" is legally binding is it?
Click to expand...

Nope. The definition is for guild membership purposes. However, the guidelines help to segment the beer market. The craft beer market segment generally is considered consisting of premium beer product (independent of taste) since its more in tune with "hand crafted" artisan production rather than mass production. Which supports/justifies the higher price.
 
chewse said:
Nope. The definition is for guild membership purposes. However, the guidelines help to segment the beer market. The craft beer market segment generally is considered consisting of premium beer product (independent of taste) since its more in tune with "hand crafted" artisan production rather than mass production. Which supports/justifies the higher price.
Click to expand...
If not taste, what constitutes premium then?
 
chewse said:
Nope. The definition is for guild membership purposes. However, the guidelines help to segment the beer market. The craft beer market segment generally is considered consisting of premium beer product (independent of taste) since its more in tune with "hand crafted" artisan production rather than mass production. Which supports/justifies the higher price.
Click to expand...

Opinions are fun, aren't they?
 
So a monopolistic company is using deceptive marketing practices to eat the smaller guy's lunch. That's called capitalism and as I understand it, most of you US people are capitalists. So what's the real problem here?
 
podz said:
So a monopolistic company is using deceptive marketing practices to eat the smaller guy's lunch. That's called capitalism and as I understand it, most of you US people are capitalists. So what's the real problem here?
Click to expand...

It's not even deceptive... Bud Light could slap Craft Beer on their label and no one could say **** because it isn't a binding or defined term by any regulatory entity, so, I don't see what the problem is. Or why anyone cares.

I know what's good and what isn't, if Budweiser came out with Bud IPA and it tasted like any of my favorites at a lower price point, you better believe I'd drink the **** out of it.

If you're buying a product and don't know who produced it, well... that's on you, isn't it?
 
This has nothing to do with Craft Beer. This is just your typical ploy by a greedy lawyer and his recruited client looking for an easy payday. Couple that with an aggressive media and voila!
 
Psylocide said:
If you're buying a product and don't know who produced it, well... that's on you, isn't it?
Click to expand...

That'd be like buying a coffee and expecting it to be hot without having to read it on a label.

We don't live in that world anymore. Haven't for a long time.

As ridiculous as this lawsuit is, I expect they'll settle before anyone wins. The guy will prolly agree to a lifetime supply of Blue Moon as compensation.
 
Psylocide said:
If you're buying a product and don't know who produced it, well... that's on you, isn't it?
Click to expand...

If you bought some chicken at the grocery store and take it home under the assumption its an American made product under American standards of production. Take it home and everyone in your family gets mercury poisoning.

You would expect the grocery store to be able to track it back to the source of where the mercury poisoning came from correct? Wouldn't you feel like they should have the chicken thats Chinese in origin and laced with mercury to be marketed and labeled "Origin country: China" and the non-mercury laced chicken to be marketed "Origin Country: USA"? This isn't meant to pick on China or chickens or anything, replace all the country names and product with whatever you want and you get to the core of the argument, we should be able to tell in seconds just by looking at the label who produces the products we consume. Is a lawsuit needed? I wish it wasn't I wish it was just part of the law that companies should ahve to put their name on the labels in a very obvious way.

I personally, before buying beer, bring up the company in google to try and find out if its owned by BMC or not. Hmm Shocktop should I buy this? Oh nope, they're owned by a big papa company. Hmm, New Glarus, nope owned by Deb and Dan Carey, looks legit to me. Should everyone have to do this? No, insert any product into the equation and you could end up in a endless spiral of trying to locate the true source of that product, shellfish is one of the few products thats regulated to a degree that makes it very easy to locate the source.
 
But did he buy it because it was "craft beer" or because he liked how it tasted? I presume that if he kept buying it he must have liked it so how does it's craftyness impact his drinking.
 
ArkotRamathorn said:
If you bought some chicken at the grocery store and take it home under the assumption its an American made product under American standards of production. Take it home and everyone in your family gets mercury poisoning.

You would expect the grocery store to be able to track it back to the source of where the mercury poisoning came from correct? Wouldn't you feel like they should have the chicken thats Chinese in origin and laced with mercury to be marketed and labeled "Origin country: China" and the non-mercury laced chicken to be marketed "Origin Country: USA"? This isn't meant to pick on China or chickens or anything, replace all the country names and product with whatever you want and you get to the core of the argument, we should be able to tell in seconds just by looking at the label who produces the products we consume. Is a lawsuit needed? I wish it wasn't I wish it was just part of the law that companies should ahve to put their name on the labels in a very obvious way.

I personally, before buying beer, bring up the company in google to try and find out if its owned by BMC or not. Hmm Shocktop should I buy this? Oh nope, they're owned by a big papa company. Hmm, New Glarus, nope owned by Deb and Dan Carey, looks legit to me. Should everyone have to do this? No, insert any product into the equation and you could end up in a endless spiral of trying to locate the true source of that product, shellfish is one of the few products thats regulated to a degree that makes it very easy to locate the source.
Click to expand...

What has that got to do with the price of tea in China?

There is a huge difference between knowingly mis-labeling a country of origin (which is illegal) and putting a term on a product that is not regulated by any legal entity, as a marketing slogan.
 
Sure, the litigation is silly. But courts have often made their own interpretations based on the plain meaning of language. There is no requirement that the term "craft beer" be defined or otherwise recognized by some regulatory body.

I do a lot of IP litigation work. Cases in that area sometimes hinge on the meaning of a single word. There is even caselaw where the scope of a patent claim comes down to a term's definition in a dictionary.

It will likely come down to what the term means in "the ordinary course of business," a standard often employed in contract and business torts law. "Craft beer" is a rather nebulous term. It's subjective. But that won't stop a court from rendering an interpretation, if the litigation gets that far. Maybe they'll do a Stewart Potter and say "I know it when I see it."

Still, I wouldn't bet against MillerCoors.
 
Psylocide said:
What has that got to do with the price of tea in China?

There is a huge difference between knowingly mis-labeling a country of origin (which is illegal) and putting a term on a product that is not regulated by any legal entity, as a marketing slogan.
Click to expand...


I was applying your logic to other areas. By your logic its on us as consumers to know the country of origin so we shouldn't have to regulate and require labeling the country of origin because of we buy a Chinese product "that's on us".

Should miller/coors and by extension any beer company be required to put their name or the name of their parent company on the label? If you say no to this then it calls into question other actual legally required labeling standards.

I am not saying the lawsuit isn't silly, the guy is kind of a moron for arguing without knowing the actual facts of the situation. Maybe he truly truly thought it was a small craft brewery owned by mom and pop making this beer and he thought he was buying the product and helping a company keep its employees working. As well maybe he loved the taste and still does, god I still do and drink it knowing full well who the parent company is (albeit blue moon makes up less than .5% of my yearly drinking quota).

It's a question of, was it deceptive of blue moon and by extension anyone selling a beer under the guise of being a craft beer? Yes. Was the guy sort of an idiot for not taking a minute to look it up? Yes. Should he have to with beer and by extension any product he consumes? No, it should be on the label so a consumer can make an informed decision same as nutrition labeling or country of origin labeling. Should a lawsuit be required to get everyone labeling their beers with their parent company names? No it should just already be on the label, but a lawsuit will be the only way to get that changed.
 
andrewmaixner said:
"craft" is the new "premium", in a few years everything will have that label and a new word will have to be chosen.
Click to expand...

The English language is in constant flux......... How many words have changed their meaning entirely in our lifetime? ....... Gay for example meant happy and cheerful when I was growing up.....now use the word intending it's real meaning (original), and at best it goes over like a fart in church..... at worst provokes a fight.....Another example is "truck"..... Something that referred to a heavy truck with at least dual wheels, but now it refers to a Toyota pickup. A new word of course will have to be chosen...... and until then let the buyer beware. There are those of us who really do not want to support the BMC brewers, regardless of the product. The fact that a BMC company bought the rights to Blue Moon speaks highly of the product. Worse is when they buy out a company like Widmer, then sink their best products.

That said, nobody can equal the BMC brewers as far as quality control and repeatability.....

H.W.
 
cmoewes said:
But did he buy it because it was "craft beer" or because he liked how it tasted? I presume that if he kept buying it he must have liked it so how does it's craftyness impact his drinking.
Click to expand...

Because BMC hate is bound only by the simple notion of "because they can".

Except that notion is challenged when consumers can't dislike a product unless they are aware it's BMC.
 
Would anyone with half a brain believe that this poor schlub had his beer-drinking world shattered upon being told that his beloved Blue Moon is mass-produced and not brewed in tiny batches at some little mom & pop micro out in the countryside?:drunk:

Hint - when a beer is stacked high in the cooler at every Walmart you walk into, it's produced in mass quantities by a large corporation.
 
ArkotRamathorn said:
I was applying your logic to other areas. By your logic its on us as consumers to know the country of origin so we shouldn't have to regulate and require labeling the country of origin because of we buy a Chinese product "that's on us".
Click to expand...

Apple-Not-Equal-to-Orange.jpg
 
Psylocide said:
Apple-Not-Equal-to-Orange.jpg
Click to expand...

If we are talking about labeling practices, its apples to apples.

How is it not apples to apples? Country of origin labeling vs. parent company labeling? One is currently legally required, one is not currently legally required.

Are you saying that miller/coors should not have to put on the label of blue moon "Product of Miller/Coors"?
 
ArkotRamathorn said:
If we are talking about labeling practices, its apples to apples.

How is it not apples to apples? Country of origin labeling vs. parent company labeling? One is currently legally required, one is not currently legally required.

Are you saying that miller/coors should not have to put on the label of blue moon "Product of Miller/Coors"?
Click to expand...
You explain the difference in your post.
 
ArkotRamathorn said:
If we are talking about labeling practices, its apples to apples.

How is it not apples to apples? Country of origin labeling vs. parent company labeling? One is currently legally required, one is not currently legally required.

Are you saying that miller/coors should not have to put on the label of blue moon "Product of Miller/Coors"?
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm saying that Country of Origin labeling is nothing like parent company labeling. At all.
 
Psylocide said:
Yes, I'm saying that Country of Origin labeling is nothing like parent company labeling. At all.
Click to expand...

It isn't. I know that already, country of origin labeling is important when we run into issues that involve someone getting mercury poisoning or a plastic bottle leaching arsenic into your babys milk. I realize the level of damage caused by not having the country of origin labeling on a product is MUCH higher than the damage caused to some dude thinking he's buying a craft beer product.

Asking something simple of a company to put their name on the label though, is an *extremely* small ask of them. Even if its small at the bottom of the can "Product of MillerCoors company", at least it is there, and consumers can make an informed decision. Maybe it switches over enough consumers to buy from a local brewery that happens to make a delicious (insert beer here) year round (though this is slightly unlikely with the whole seasonal availability deal). Hyperbole: maybe by switching over that one drinker it made the difference between the local small company from shutting down or not (end hyperbole)

My point being, yes, I realize the level of damage caused by country of original labeling vs. parent company labeling is an ocean apart. Though, that does not change that I think that it should be required, however we arrive at that place where they put their names on those products is fine with me, I wish it was a simple law that gets passed and done, they have to put their name on the labeling.
 
ArkotRamathorn said:
If we are talking about labeling practices, its apples to apples.

How is it not apples to apples? Country of origin labeling vs. parent company labeling? One is currently legally required, one is not currently legally required.

Are you saying that miller/coors should not have to put on the label of blue moon "Product of Miller/Coors"?
Click to expand...

You've obviously never looked at a house-brand item from Walmart, Costco, Aldi, etc. Those typically state "distributed by [store]" Those products usually don't state who produced it. I guess that must be "deceptive" as well. :cross:
 
MaxStout said:
You've obviously never looked at a house-brand item from Walmart, Costco, Aldi, etc. Those typically state "distributed by [store]" Those products usually don't state who produced it. I guess that must be "deceptive" as well. :cross:
Click to expand...

If I am buying a house-brand product at a store, if I need/want to know, I look it up. Same as how I would treat a beer I an contemplating buying, I learned the practice *from* "craft" beer. Should everyone have to go through the same steps? No. I take the responsibility on myself to know what I am buying. If I am buying the house-brand product I am not buying it cause I am thinking its locally made organic fancy saltine crackers, I am buying the house brand because its usually the cheapest.

Recently a lot of my family got really up in arms about the whole fish bladder non-sense being in Guiness. They didn't spend any time to look up the fact that its used in a lot of wine to clear wine as well, and I had to set them straight that they've probably consumed it in wine. So I am not always the pitch forks and burning torches type, I wish a lawsuit had never been file but I also wish the Blue Moon label had the parent company information on it already then we can tell guys like this dude who filed the lawsuit that, he's a gigantic moron for not reading the entire label.
 
I buy our local grocer's store-brand ice cream. The grocery store doesn't actually make it. The label just says "Made with care for [grocery store name]", but doesn't mention who specifically manufactured it. I don't care who made it, and continue to buy it because I like the way it tastes and it's cheaper than Blue Bell.

Either you like Blue Moon or you don't. Who owns the company that produces it is pretty irrelevant to me.
 
I don't know if there's an agreed-upon definition of craft beer. I'm sure MillerCoors can find any number of experts to say that it's beer is "crafted". Frankly, I don't consider it craft beer, but I can't say it's really crossing any "bright line" to call it so.

I think ABInbev products, like Goose Island, now say "brewed in Baldwinsville and Chicago and LA" (or something--can't remember the third one).
 
I think it's a simple matter of people having the common decency to not file petty lawsuits against businesses and businesses having the common decency to market a product for what it actually is. Maybe that's asking too much..
 

Similar threads

Tobor_8thMan
Commercial Beer Masquerading as Craft Beer -- Help Keep List Up-to-Date
Replies
30
Views
4K
m303wb
M
T
Constellation Brands Sells Ballast Point to Kings & Convicts Brewing
Replies
18
Views
1K
Northern_Brewer
Northern_Brewer
M
"The ideal starter" - Transcript of an article on braumagazin.de
Replies
17
Views
2K
TheMadKing
TheMadKing
theheadonthedoor
Beer Buyouts
2
Replies
70
Views
4K
jensek
J
Dcpcooks
The cost of craft beer, holy cow that's pricey.
Replies
21
Views
2K
Singletrack
Singletrack
wps-hbt2

Latest posts

Back
Top