Business
Cannabis Caught Up In Naming War
It started with champagne and now has hit cannabis. Pride of name is not only respectful, but can be very lucrative, and cannabis is the latest in a series of lawsuits and mandates about what you can call a product. Canadian cannabis companies are in a pickle with a new naming regulation regarding certain products.
Champagne started the trend after WWI. French vinters wanted to protect the use of the term “champagne”. Only bubbly made using traditional methods from grapes grown and vinified in the Champagne region of France would only be allowed the moniker. When the Treaty of Versailles was signed in 1919 ending WWI, the French inserted limits on the use of the name. It was ratified by all the players, except the United States.
Korbel and Miller have used the term champagne liberally for decades. Miller Beer refers to itself as the champagne of beers. In 2006, the United States and the European Union signed a wine-trade agreement, and the champagne name issue resurfaced. This time, the United States agreed to not allow new uses of certain terms that were previously considered to be “semi-generic,” such as “Champagne” (as well as “Burgundy,” “Chablis,” “Port” and “Chianti”). But anyone who already had an approved label, Korbel and Miller High Life two key players, could continue with use.
Xerox works hard to ensure its brand names avoids becoming generic. Xerox, which manufactures photocopying and printing machines, is arguably one of the most famous examples of a trademarked name being used in everyday speech, but not yet becoming a generic term. This is thanks to a major advertising campaign including. “When you use ‘Xerox’ the way you use ‘Aspirin,’ we get a headache.” Aspirin was a trademark owned by Bayer until 1919. Xerox has worked with dictionary publishers in an effort to convince them to define ‘Xerox’ as a trademark as well as a company.
Despite efforts, Coke became a generic name in ordering soda, especially in the American South. They lost out and now people can order a coke and receive a Pepsi, Costco cola or anything else.
Now Canada has ruled cannabis beverages can not be called soda or cola. Health Canada, which oversees the marijuana industry, has decided cannabis products can not be called soda or cola due to the potential to appeal kids.
A Health Canada spokesperson referred to a policy statement on the Cannabis Act stating they determine whether a product appeals to young people based on specific circumstances and factors.
These factors encompass the product’s name, shape, smell, color, flavor, and how it is presented to consumers. According to the spokesperson, terms such as “soda,” “root beer,” “cola,” and “ginger ale” are considered potentially attractive to youth due to their association with soft drinks, which falls under the prohibited examples outlined in the policy statement.
This enforcement action could significantly impact the thriving market of carbonated cannabis beverages, which currently represent approximately 60% of all cannabis beverage sales.
According to an analysis conducted by market analytics firm Headset, nearly half of the top-selling carbonated cannabis beverages could face repercussions from this directive.
This will litigated in court and in back rooms with the outcome far from decided. Think of milk. Soy, oat, almond and other drinks billing themselves as “milk” can continue using the name, according to draft federal rules released in February of this year. The dairy industry was highly distressed.
And it is still up in the air if plant based protein is allowed to be called meat. Stay tuned for further developments.
Source: https://thefreshtoast.com/cannabis/cannabis-caught-up-in-naming-war/
New Mexico regulators fined a cannabis operator nearly $300,000 and revoked its license after the company allegedly created fake reports in the state’s traceability software.
The New Mexico Cannabis Control Division (CCD) accused marijuana manufacturer and retailer Golden Roots of 11 violations, according to Albuquerque Business First.
Golden Roots operates the The Cannabis Revolution Dispensary.
The majority of the violations are related to the Albuquerque company’s improper use of BioTrack, which has been New Mexico’s track-and-trace vendor since 2015.
The CCD alleges Golden Roots reported marijuana production only two months after it had received its vertically integrated license, according to Albuquerque Business First.
Because cannabis takes longer than two months to be cultivated, the CCD was suspicious of the report.
After inspecting the company’s premises, the CCD alleged Golden Roots reported cultivation, transportation and sales in BioTrack but wasn’t able to provide officers who inspected the site evidence that the operator was cultivating cannabis.
In April, the CCD revoked Golden Roots’ license and issued a $10,000 fine, according to the news outlet.
The company requested a hearing, which the regulator scheduled for Sept. 1.
At the hearing, the CCD testified that the company’s dried-cannabis weights in BioTrack were suspicious because they didn’t seem to accurately reflect how much weight marijuana loses as it dries.
Company employees also poorly accounted for why they were making adjustments in the system of up to 24 pounds of cannabis, making comments such as “bad” or “mistake” in the software, Albuquerque Business First reported.
Golden Roots was fined $298,972.05 – the amount regulators allege the company made selling products that weren’t properly accounted for in BioTrack.
The CCD has been cracking down on cannabis operators accused of selling products procured from out-of-state or not grown legally:
- Regulators alleged in August that Albuquerque dispensary Sawmill Sweet Leaf sold out-of-state products and didn’t have a license for extraction.
- Paradise Exotics Distro lost its license in July after regulators alleged the company sold products made in California.
Golden Roots was the first alleged rulebreaker in New Mexico to be asked to pay a large fine.
Source: https://mjbizdaily.com/new-mexico-cannabis-operator-fined-loses-license-for-alleged-biotrack-fraud/
Four marijuana companies, including a multistate operator, have filed a lawsuit against U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland in which they allege the federal MJ prohibition under the Controlled Substances Act is no longer constitutional.
According to the complaint, filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts, retailer Canna Provisions, Treevit delivery service CEO Gyasi Sellers, cultivator Wiseacre Farm and MSO Verano Holdings Corp. are all harmed by “the federal government’s unconstitutional ban on cultivating, manufacturing, distributing, or possessing intrastate marijuana.”
Verano is headquartered in Chicago but has operations in Massachusetts; the other three operators are based in Massachusetts.
The lawsuit seeks a ruling that the “Controlled Substances Act is unconstitutional as applied to the intrastate cultivation, manufacture, possession, and distribution of marijuana pursuant to state law.”
The companies want the case to go before the U.S. Supreme Court.
They hired prominent law firm Boies Schiller Flexner to represent them.
The New York-based firm’s principal is David Boies, whose former clients include Microsoft, former presidential candidate Al Gore and Elizabeth Holmes’ disgraced startup Theranos.
Similar challenges to the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) have failed.
One such challenge led to a landmark Supreme Court decision in 2005.
In Gonzalez vs. Raich, the highest court in the United States ruled in a 6-3 decision that the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution gave Congress the power to outlaw marijuana federally, even though state laws allow the cultivation and sale of cannabis.
In the 18 years since that ruling, 23 states and the District of Columbia have legalized adult-use marijuana and the federal government has allowed a multibillion-dollar cannabis industry to thrive.
Since both Congress and the U.S. Department of Justice, currently headed by Garland, have declined to intervene in state-licensed marijuana markets, the key facts that led to the Supreme Court’s 2005 ruling “no longer apply,” Boies said in a statement Thursday.
“The Supreme Court has since made clear that the federal government lacks the authority to regulate purely intrastate commerce,” Boies said.
“Moreover, the facts on which those precedents are based are no longer true.”
Verano President Darren Weiss said in a statement the company is “prepared to bring this case all the way to the Supreme Court in order to align federal law with how Congress has acted for years.”
While the Biden administration’s push to reschedule marijuana would help solve marijuana operators’ federal tax woes, neither rescheduling nor modest Congressional reforms such as the SAFER Banking Act “solve the fundamental issue,” Weiss added.
“The application of the CSA to lawful state-run cannabis business is an unconstitutional overreach on state sovereignty that has led to decades of harm, failed businesses, lost jobs, and unsafe working conditions.”
Alabama regulators are targeting Dec. 1 to award the first batch of medical cannabis business licenses after the agency’s first two attempts were scrapped because of scoring errors and litigation.
The first licenses will be awarded to individual cultivators, delivery providers, processors, dispensaries and state testing labs, according to the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission (AMCC).
Then, on Dec. 12, the AMCC will award licenses for vertically integrated operations, a designation set primarily for multistate operators.
Licenses are expected to be handed out 28 days after they have been awarded, so MMJ production could begin in early January, according to the Alabama Daily News.
That means MMJ products could be available for patients around early March, an AMCC spokesperson told the media outlet.
Regulators initially awarded 21 business licenses in June, only to void them after applicants alleged inconsistencies with how the applications were scored.
Then, in August, the state awarded 24 different licenses – 19 went to June recipients – only to reverse themselves again and scratch those licenses after spurned applicants filed lawsuits.
A state judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by Chicago-based MSO Verano Holdings Corp., but another lawsuit is pending.
Source: https://mjbizdaily.com/alabama-plans-to-award-medical-cannabis-licenses-dec-1/
New Mexico cannabis operator fined, loses license for alleged BioTrack fraud
Marijuana companies suing US attorney general in federal prohibition challenge
Alabama to make another attempt Dec. 1 to award medical cannabis licenses
Pot Odor Does Not Justify Probable Cause for Vehicle Searches, Minnesota Court Affirms
New Mexico cannabis operator fined, loses license for alleged BioTrack fraud
Alabama to make another attempt Dec. 1 to award medical cannabis licenses
-
Business1 year agoPot Odor Does Not Justify Probable Cause for Vehicle Searches, Minnesota Court Affirms
-
Business1 year agoNew Mexico cannabis operator fined, loses license for alleged BioTrack fraud
-
Business1 year agoAlabama to make another attempt Dec. 1 to award medical cannabis licenses
-
Business1 year agoWashington State Pays Out $9.4 Million in Refunds Relating to Drug Convictions
-
Business1 year agoMarijuana companies suing US attorney general in federal prohibition challenge
-
Business1 year agoLegal Marijuana Handed A Nothing Burger From NY State
-
Business1 year agoCan Cannabis Help Seasonal Depression
-
Blogs1 year agoCannabis Art Is Flourishing On Etsy