<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories about &quot;nestle&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 8 Mar 2013 17:00:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Horse, The Other Other Red Meat</title>
<dc:creator>Joyce Hung</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101208/01334112182/dailydirt-horse-other-other-red-meat.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101208/01334112182/dailydirt-horse-other-other-red-meat.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Just when you thought the horse meat scandal in Europe was winding down, it's once again getting media attention as more cases continue to pop up. But is horse meat really that bad? According to <a href="http://theweek.com/article/index/240564/6-descriptions-of-what-horse-meat-actually-tastes-like">people who have (willingly) eaten it</a>, horse meat has been described as being lean, tender, sweet, juicy, like a mix between beef and venison, and better than a really good beef steak. Perhaps beef products in Europe should just come with a label that says: "May contain traces of horse meat." Here are a few more links about horse meat. 

<ul>

<li> <a title="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323384604578325864020138732.html" href="http://on.wsj.com/VM2DUU">Traces of horse meat were found in IKEA's signature meatballs which had been distributed to 21 European countries.</a> Did you know that food sales make up 5% of the Swedish furniture giant's $35.6 billion revenue, and that about 150 million IKEA meatballs are consumed globally? [<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323384604578325864020138732.html">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/20/world/europe/nestle-pulls-2-products-in-horse-meat-scandal.html" href="http://nyti.ms/XfzAIU">Nestle has had to remove two of its pasta products from store shelves in Europe after traces of horse DNA were found in them.</a> In both cases, the amount of horse DNA found in the products was higher than the 1% threshold which the British Food Standards Agency uses as an indicator of adulteration in foods. [<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/20/world/europe/nestle-pulls-2-products-in-horse-meat-scandal.html">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/food/2012/10/m_wells_dinette_horse_meat_scandal_why_horse_meat_is_more_dangerous_than.html" href="http://slate.me/YyIlej">People were up in arms recently when chef Hugue Dufour announced that he was going to serve horse tartare at his restaurant, M. Wells Dinette, in Queens, NY.</a> With all the public opposition, Dufour decided it was best to drop the horse tartare from the menu, because he didn't want to be famous for "scandalizing animal lovers." That's probably for the best, since horse meat (esp. that sourced from the horse racing industry) could contain all sorts of drugs, including phenylbutazone, which is a carcinogen and has been strongly linked to bone marrow and liver problems in humans. [<a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/food/2012/10/m_wells_dinette_horse_meat_scandal_why_horse_meat_is_more_dangerous_than.html">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2013/02/21/eat-horse-meat-ok-wrong/" href="http://bit.ly/YyIGO9">Here are some fun facts about eating horse meat:</a> During World War II, Americans ate lots of horse meat when beef was scarce; In 723 A.D., Pope Gregory III declared that eating horse meat was a "filthy and abominable" pagan custom; In 2011, President Obama made horse slaughter for human consumption legal again; Until 1985, the Harvard Faculty Club reportedly served horse steaks, prepared "chicken fried" with a mushroom sauce; and apparently, horse meat is a healthier option than beef, since it's high in protein and omega-3 fatty acids, low in fat and cholesterol, and has twice as much iron and Vitamin B. [<a href="http://blogs.phillymag.com/the_philly_post/2013/02/21/eat-horse-meat-ok-wrong/">url</a>]</li>

</ul>


If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt post</a>.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101208/01334112182/dailydirt-horse-other-other-red-meat.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101208/01334112182/dailydirt-horse-other-other-red-meat.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101208/01334112182/dailydirt-horse-other-other-red-meat.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20101208/01334112182</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2012 05:12:02 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Nestle: Buy Our Candy So We Can Hunt You Down</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120920/11564120451/nestle-buy-our-candy-so-we-can-hunt-you-down.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120920/11564120451/nestle-buy-our-candy-so-we-can-hunt-you-down.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Corporate contests. They so often lead to hijinks at the hands of technology, such as that time the internet decided Mountain Dew's <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120814/14544720050/famous-prankster-internet-hijacks-another-promotional-campaign.shtml">new flavor</a> should be "Gushing Granny." Oh, and there was that one online promotion that sent something called Taylor Swift to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120831/18494920234/4chan-reroutes-promotional-contest-lines-taylor-swift-up-concert-horace-mann-school-deaf.shtml">sing</a> at a school for the deaf. But, lest you think that this volatile mixture of technology and corporate contests is good only for laughs, picture the following.<br />
<br />
You're walking down a street in a European city, reading about how something someone did somewhere upset a major world religion, and you decide you need respite from the madness of the news. So you walk into a corner store, buy a candy bar, and tear it open, ready to bite into a soft, gooey explosion of stress-melting flavor-gasm. That, of course, is when the black helicopters and MiBs appear out of nowhere, rushing you with an ominous black suitcase. If someone froze you right there in that moment, what do you think you would likely expect to happen next?<br />
<center>
<p>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/59118198@N03/5415698349/" title="NUKE by qqqqqq47, on Flickr"><img alt="NUKE" height="192" src="http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5013/5415698349_afecf6e8cc.jpg" width="300" /></a><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 10px">Image <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/59118198@N03/5415698349/">source</a>: CC BY 2.0</span></p>
</center>
<p>
Well, you'd be wrong (probably). Because those aren't darkly dressed neo-terrorists that have for some reason decided to specifically blow you up with a neutron bomb (dear <i>lord</i>, you're self-centered). No, it's your friendly folks at Nestle, <a href="http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/marketing-gone-wild-candy-bars-stalk-you">responding to the GPS technology in your treat</a> to hand you &pound;10,000 in cold, pants-crappingly terrifying cash. It's all part of the new Nestle contest to reward customers by tracking them down via GPS technology in their candybars within 24 hours of being consumed. They named this campaign "Nestle: we will find you!", because apparently "Nestle: we could find and kill you for eating our products anytime we wanted to" didn't strike quite the right tone.<br />
<br />
Now, I know what you're thinking. You're thinking that there's no reason for me to think this contest will play out the way I described above. Well, here's Nestle's own ad for the contest.</p>
<center>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/sk2Lfgh1c4Q" width="560"></iframe>
</center>
<p>
Now, I'm generally all for creative promotions, but this all seems terrifying. A private company is going to track me down via GPS and throw a suitcase at me in a major city? Well, not me, since not only am I not European, but I'm one of the six people on the planet that absolutely hates chocolate...but <i>you</i>, sweet Euro-reader! It could be you who fudges your pants after eating fudge! So, in conclusion, the article gives a listing of the candy bars you should avoid if you don't want to be hunted down.
<blockquote>
<p>
<i>The grand prizes for Nestle's We Will Find You promotion, involve these four chocolate products: KitKat 4 Finger, KitKat Chunky, Aero Peppermint Medium and Yorkie Milk.</i></p></blockquote>
</p><p>
($10 says there's a <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120906/07215720294/poor-ben-jerry-must-have-had-rough-adolescence-if-they-think-ice-cream-can-be-confused-with-porn.shtml">porno parody</a> of those candy names out there somewhere.)
</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120920/11564120451/nestle-buy-our-candy-so-we-can-hunt-you-down.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120920/11564120451/nestle-buy-our-candy-so-we-can-hunt-you-down.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120920/11564120451/nestle-buy-our-candy-so-we-can-hunt-you-down.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>and-scare-the-nougat-out-of-you</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120920/11564120451</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 17:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Girl Scout Cookies Make Everything Better</title>
<dc:creator>Joyce Hung</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120301/16164617937/dailydirt-girl-scout-cookies-make-everything-better.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120301/16164617937/dailydirt-girl-scout-cookies-make-everything-better.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Many people have a weakness for Girl Scout Cookies. They come in so many different varieties -- Thin Mints, Samoas, Tagalongs, Do-Si-Dos, Trefoils, Shout Outs!, Thanks-A-Lot, Savannah Smiles, Thank U Berry Munch, Dulce de Leche, and Lemonades -- but by far, <a href="http://www.girlscoutcookies.org/default.asp?page=MeetCookies">Samoas are most popular</a>, followed closely by Thin Mints. Too bad the cookie season is ending, but here are a few Girl Scout Cookie-related links to tide you over until next season.

<ul>
<li> <a title="http://laughingsquid.com/the-nestle-crunch-thin-mints-girl-scout-cookie-hybrid-candy-bar-is-real/" href="http://bit.ly/GFV2xi"> Apparently, Nestle Crunch Thin Mints Girl Scout Cookie hybrid candy bars are <i>real</i>, in all their "dark chocolate cookie wafers and mint chocolate creme, topped with airy crispies" goodness.</a>  These limited edition candy bars will be available later this year, and other popular Girl Scout Cookie flavors, like Samoas and Tagalongs, will also be available. [<a href="http://laughingsquid.com/the-nestle-crunch-thin-mints-girl-scout-cookie-hybrid-candy-bar-is-real/">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://bakingbites.com/2009/01/homemade-girl-scout-cookie-recipes/" href="http://bit.ly/GII86r">If you just can't wait until next season -- or if you object to consuming partially hydrogenated oils -- you can always make your own Girl Scout Cookies at home.</a> There are recipes out there for the most popular flavors, and there are also many variations, like Gluten-Free Thin Mints and Samoas Scones. [<a href="http://bakingbites.com/2009/01/homemade-girl-scout-cookie-recipes/">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="https://www.change.org/petitions/girl-scouts-make-your-cookies-rainforest-safe" href="http://chn.ge/GSdSCW">Did you know that the palm oil used to make Girl Scout Cookies endangers rainforests and thousands of species of wildlife, and contributes to human rights abuses? </a> If you want guilt-free cookies, go sign the petition to eliminate the use of unsustainable palm oil in Girl Scout Cookies. [<a href="https://www.change.org/petitions/girl-scouts-make-your-cookies-rainforest-safe">url</a>]</li>

<li><b>To discover more food-related links, <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:102" href="http://bit.ly/iaJVJd">check out what's floating around in StumbleUpon.</a></b> [<a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:102">url</a>]  <a title="what's this?" href="#" class="whatsthis help_ddstumble">&nbsp;</a>
</li>
</ul> 

By the way, StumbleUpon can also recommend some good <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt</a> articles, too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120301/16164617937/dailydirt-girl-scout-cookies-make-everything-better.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120301/16164617937/dailydirt-girl-scout-cookies-make-everything-better.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120301/16164617937/dailydirt-girl-scout-cookies-make-everything-better.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120301/16164617937</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 16:03:59 PST</pubDate>
<title>The Color Purple... Trademarked Again</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111118/04123516814/color-purple-trademarked-again.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111118/04123516814/color-purple-trademarked-again.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Wait, didn't we <i>just</i> have a story about some knitting needle company <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111107/01412516653/color-purple-trademarked.shtml">trademarking the color purple</a>?  Indeed, we did, but apparently others are doing the same thing as well.  Over in the UK, there was actually a legal battle going on over this, with Cadbury <a href="http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1088604--the-colour-purple-belongs-to-cadbury">trying to trademark the color purple</a>, and competitor Nestle trying to oppose the efforts.  However, the UK Intellectual Property Office apparently has no problem with trademarking colors and gave Cadbury the official trademark.
<blockquote><i>
Nestle argued that a colour cannot be trademarked because colours are widely used in trade and purple was commonly in use by other companies when Cadbury applied for the trademark.
<br /><br />
The registrar came down in favour of Cadbury, citing the results of research showing that consumers strongly associated the colour purple with Dairy Milk, which was the best-selling chocolate bar in the U.K. at the time of the application in 2004.
</i></blockquote>
The reasoning behind all of this is a little bizarre.  Just think for a second, if you were unfamiliar with the details of trademark law and realized that there was a legal dispute over who owned the color purple.  How do you read the following two sentences and not wonder why anyone would ever be bothering about the ridiculous idea of trying to own a color.
<blockquote><i>
The registrar came down in favour of Cadbury, citing the results of research showing that consumers strongly associated the colour purple with Dairy Milk, which was the best-selling chocolate bar in the U.K. at the time of the application in 2004.
<br /><br />
Nestle scored some concessions. The registrar ruled that Cadbury had not shown that its use of the colour purple in relation to chocolate assortments was strong enough to be included.
</i></blockquote>
It just feels like absolutely everyone involved in that dispute could have been doing some kind of work that actually mattered, rather than arguing over this.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111118/04123516814/color-purple-trademarked-again.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111118/04123516814/color-purple-trademarked-again.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111118/04123516814/color-purple-trademarked-again.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>didn't-we-just-do-this?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20111118/04123516814</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 9 Jun 2010 13:56:58 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Amazon Sued For Selling Smarties</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100609/0126569748.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100609/0126569748.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ I remember, as a kid, enjoying "Smarties" candies, which were basically hard pill-like tablets of pure sugar that were sold in rolls.  It turns out that in the rest of the world, there's a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smarties" target="_blank">totally different kind of Smarties</a>, made by Nestl&eacute;, which appear to be something like M&#038;Ms (honestly, I had no idea).  Those Smarties have been around since 1882.  The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smarties_%28Ce_De_Candy%29" target="_blank">American kind</a> of Smarties (the sugar pills) have been made by Ce De Candy since 1942.  Of course, now we live in a global world, and the two types of Smarties are coming into conflict, with Amazon in the middle.  Apparently, the Ce De Candy company has obsessively kept the real Smarties out of the US for years (hence my ignorance of them).  In other countries, Ce De Candy has rebranded its Smarties -- such that, in Canada, they're called Rockets.  However, it apparently has no interest in doing so in the US, so we're left without the Smarties the rest of the world knows and loves.
<br /><br />
But, yes, in this global world, with lots of immigrants and travelers, plenty of people in the US would like the other kind of Smarties, and found they could get their supply via Amazon.  And, <a href="http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2010/06/amazon_slapped_with_lawsuit_over_smarties.html?ana=from_rss&#038;utm_source=feedburner&#038;utm_medium=feed&#038;utm_campaign=Feed%3A TechFlash %28TechFlash - Seattle%27s Technology News Source%29" target="_blank">for that Amazon is facing a lawsuit</a> by Ce De Candy, claiming trademark infringement.  I can't see how Amazon should be the one to be blamed here, though.  It is accurately selling products.  In fact, my guess is that it's not even Amazon doing the selling, but some of Amazon's merchants who are actually fulfilling the market desire for the "real" Smarties.  Unfortunately, due to some legal quirks, trademark law doesn't have an automatic safe harbor, like the DMCA or Section 230 of the CDA, protecting third party service providers from lawsuits over actions of their users.  But, either way, hopefully a court recognizes that this whole thing is ridiculous and tells Ce De Candy to go pound sugar...
<center>
<object id="_ds_42650369" name="_ds_42650369" width="560" height="550" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="http://viewer.docstoc.com/"><param name="FlashVars" value="doc_id=42650369&#038;mem_id=715794&#038;doc_type=pdf&#038;fullscreen=0&#038;allowdownload=1&#038;showrelated=0&#038;showotherdocs=0" /><param name="movie" value="http://viewer.docstoc.com/"/><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /></object>
</center><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100609/0126569748.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100609/0126569748.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100609/0126569748.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>dumbies</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100609/0126569748</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:25:43 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Nestle Discovers The Streisand Effect... But Only After Making Things Worse And Worse... And Worse</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100318/1237168618.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100318/1237168618.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Earlier this week, reader Jorvay sent over the news of how food giant Nestle had massively overreacted to an (admittedly disgusting) anti-Nestle video put together by Greenpeace and posted to YouTube.  The thing was, this video was getting <i>no attention</i>.  It had less than 1,000 views... but someone who should have known better at Nestle <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/kit-kat-spat-goes-viral-despite-nestls-efforts/article1503795/?cmpid=1" target="_blank">filed a bogus copyright claim to take down the video</a>.  There is no copyright issue in the video <i>at all</i>, so it was a bogus takedown.  Even if there had been a legit reason for the takedown, doing so only drew <i>much</i> more attention to the issue, and the video quickly went back up on Vimeo, where it started getting even more views, a lot of which came <i>because</i> of the takedown.
<br><br>
Okay, bad enough, right?  I was going to post that story, but before I had the chance, Nestle decided to make things worse.
<br><br>
Because of all this new attention, a bunch of anti-Nestle people went to Nestle's Facebook group, and started posting messages that were certainly anti-Nestle.  Now, there are <i>lots</i> of ways to respond to such things.  The one thing you <i>don't</i> want to do is respond the way Nestle's "moderator" did.  First, they <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13577_3-20000805-36.html?part=rss&amp;subj=news&amp;tag=2547-1_3-0-20" target="_blank">threatened to delete comments</a> from anyone using a modified Nestle's logo, claiming that this infringed on trademarks (which is an interesting claim, but unlikely to hold up in court, where countless times the use of a logo in protest has been upheld).  This resulted in some pointed responses from group members, such as "It's not OK for people to use altered versions of your logos, but it's OK for you to alter the face of Indonesian rainforests? Wow!"
<br><br>
Nestle then didn't do itself any favors by having its moderator respond sarcastically ("Oh please...it's like we're censoring everything to allow only positive comments") and then go with the <a href="http://adage.com/adages/post?article_id=142881" target="_blank">foot stomping</a> response as well ("it's our page, we set the rules, it was ever thus.")
<br><br>
Eventually, Nestle admitted that it was wrong and apologized, promising that the moderator would be a lot friendlier.  However, by then the damage had been done.  An issue that very, very few people would have noticed turned into a huge ordeal thanks to repeated mistakes in handling them.  The company attempted to stifle speech with both bogus copyright and trademark claims, and then when called on it failed to realize that it was only making things worse.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100318/1237168618.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100318/1237168618.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100318/1237168618.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>how-not-to-do-things</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100318/1237168618</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 5 Nov 2009 22:44:40 PST</pubDate>
<title>Nestle's Kit Kat Bars Give Consumers An RtB In Japan</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091102/0435486765.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091102/0435486765.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Techdirt reader <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/profile.php?u=dancekat1">Kathy</a> writes in to let us know about the 200 different flavors of Kit Kat candy bars in Japan.  Public Radio International describes how Nestle has developed an interesting sales strategy in Japan where the competition among retailers is apparently so great that stores benefit from constantly updating their shelves with new products.  In such a marketplace, Nestle has adopted numerous varieties of its Kit Kat candy bars that can only be purchased in certain locations or at specific times of the year.  So instead of trying to peddle the same merchandise to everyone, Nestle has <a href='http://www.theworld.org/2009/10/30/kit-kat-big-in-japan/'>effectively given consumers a reason to buy (RtB)</a> -- by making limited edition flavors and targeting the local tastes and customs in Japan.  Nestle caters to Japan's <i>omiage</i> gift-giving culture (where friends are expected to bring back unique trinkets when they travel) with regional Kit Kats.  So for example, a potato-flavored version is only sold in the northern part of Japan known for its potatoes, so northerners (or traveling southerners) can give out unique treats that aren't available nationwide.  And all over Japan, the candy bars have also been packaged with mailing labels -- so that the candy can be sent as "good luck" charms.  Due to the ingenious connection to the Japanese words <i>Kitto Katsu</i> which mean "you will surely win", the "good luck" symbol for Kit Kats in Japan was also successfully manufactured and marketed and as a result, Kit Kats have been popular with exam-taking students who seem to want good luck, however they can get it.
<br /><br />
Clearly, Nestle must be admired for its efforts to connect with candy fans.  And it's particularly brilliant to see them bundle candy bars as good luck charms -- a story that adds intangible value to the otherwise ordinary snacks.  Perhaps it's only a matter of time before some artists write some flavor-inspired songs/plays/films and try to sell loooots of Kit Kats, too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091102/0435486765.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091102/0435486765.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091102/0435486765.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>you-will-surely-win</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091102/0435486765</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 6 Mar 2009 18:01:18 PST</pubDate>
<title>Nestle Sues Company That Came Up A Product 15 Years Before Nestle Patented It...</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090305/0256024006.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090305/0256024006.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Today's story of patent insanity comes to us courtesy of Wysong, a small natural pet foods company that came up with a method to put <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probiotic">probiotics</a> in foods in the early 80s.  The company used the technique to sell pet food biscuits that supposedly have certain health benefits.  As its products became more popular, the company saw copycats come into the market, but figured it helped everyone (including the pets), and there was nothing wrong with that.  Then... fifteen years later, Nestle, the owner of Purina, happened to patent the very same process and, a few years later, <a href="http://www.wysong.net/wysong-vs-purina.php" target="_new">sued Wysong, demanding royalties all the way back to when it got its patent</a>.  Wysong's owners responded, pointing out that their product had been on the market since long before Nestle's patent... to which Nestle responded with a threat to sue Wysong in federal court.  Knowing Wysong probably didn't have the millions of dollars it would take to fight a patent lawsuit, Nestle tried to pressure them to just give in and settle right away.  The company is fighting back (and has been able to stop Nestle from getting an identical patent in Europe thanks to its prior art), but it's a costly battle.
<br /><br />
The patent system defenders who are always quick to comment on this site like to talk about how they're really defenders of "small inventors" against evil "big businesses" who are trying to steal their work.  I'm curious what they think about this case, where the exact opposite is happening?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090305/0256024006.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090305/0256024006.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090305/0256024006.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>ain't-the-patent-system-great?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20090305/0256024006</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>