3 ms·
> I think consumers are clever enough to differentiate between Oatly or PureOaty. I wouldn't. It took me a double take to notice the missing l, and that's with
by Danieru 5y ago
> I think consumers are clever enough to differentiate between Oatly or PureOaty.
I wouldn't. It took me a double take to notice the missing l, and that's with your sentence priming me to see a difference. In the store I might ponder on why the pure version existed.
Seeing them both in a store I'd have expected PureOatly was the unflavored version.
- uxcolumbo 5y agoInteresting, but what would you expect the unflavoured version to be. Oats have a quite distinct taste. Or do you mean less sweet? Anyway, thanks for your perspective. Don't you think the packaging is quite different though? Oatly is quite bold, uses a unique style and using 'Original' on their packaging. PureOatly packaging looks quite generic - a 'cheaper' design quality so to speak.
- r00fus 5y agoI just looked and I think you'd need to squint really hard to think they were related. Different color, different font, different layout, there's literally no copying of Oatly's design other than the y at the end of the word Oat (which, as a common word, isn't brand able on it's own).
- Danieru 5y agoAgain, role playing as me standing in the store trying to decide between these two Oaty miks I would either assume Oatly was a generic term for oat milk, or that the flavored version had a recent package redesign. Keep in mind the designs can change. Right now I think with these two branding I would think Oatly was a generic descriptor.
- r00fus 5y agoThe law of it very much takes into account brand design. Just because PureOaty won, doesn't mean they can change packaging and be immune to another suit.