Search Site   
Current News Stories
Take time to squish the peas and have a good laugh
By mid-April, sun about 70 percent of the way to summer solstice
Central State to supervise growing 
African heritage crops on farms in Ohio
Bird flu now confirmed on dairy farms in 6 states
Work begins on developing a farm labor pipeline to ease shortages
Celebration of Modern Ag planned for the National Mall
University of Illinois students attend MANRRS conference in Chicago
Biofuels manufacturers can begin claiming carbon credits in 2025
Farm Foundation names latest Young Agri-Food Leaders cohort
Ohio Farm Bureau members talk ag with state legislators
March planting report verifies less corn will be planted
   
News Articles
Search News  
   
U.S. District Court dismisses lawsuit over pork trademarks
 


WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Feb. 2 dismissed a lawsuit challenging the sale of the “Pork. The Other White Meat.” trademarks the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) sold to the National Pork Board (NPB) in 2006 for $35 million.

Last month, the USDA filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS) against the agency over the sale by the NPPC to the NPB of the famous trademarks – a purchase the USDA had approved.

USDA’s Jan. 6 motion authorized the transaction as part of its oversight responsibilities under the 1985 Pork Act, which set up the pork checkoff program and established the National Pork Board in Des Moines to administer it.

“We are conducting a thorough review of the decision and evaluating our options,” said Ken Maschhoff, NPPC president and a Carlyle, Ill., pork producer.

“We are disappointed that the court partially denied the USDA’s motion to dismiss this frivolous lawsuit, one that was never based on a legitimate legal challenge to a federally approved transaction but instead was brought by an anti-meat activist group intent on eliminating meat consumption and harming a vast U.S. industry that employs hundreds of thousands of Americans and feeds billions of people at home and abroad.”

The USDA argued the lawsuit, filed by HSUS and two other parties, lacked merit, was barred by a six-year statute of limitations and that the plaintiffs failed to establish standing to file the lawsuit or show they were harmed by the sale of the trademarks. USDA’s evaluation of the sale of the trademarks showed they provided significant value to the pork industry.

In 2012, HSUS and other plaintiffs – which included Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, an environmental and animal activist group, and an individual Iowa resident who is a member of the group – claimed the trademarks were sold for an inflated price.

The U.S. District Court had dismissed the suit for lack of standing. But a federal appeals court in August 2015 reinstated it, sending the case back to the District Court. Before any proceedings on the merits of the lawsuit, the USDA inexplicably entered into settlement talks with the HSUS.

The NPPC sold the assets, widely regarded as one of the most recognizable marketing brand assets in history, for an estimated $35 million, financing the purchase over 20 years, making the NPB’s annual payment $3 million.

A USDA-conducted study later valued the trademarks at between $113 million-$132 million. Despite the nearly quadruple increase in value, the HSUS decided to continue its lawsuit.

The goal of the “Pork. The Other White Meat.” campaign was to increase consumer demand for pork and to dispel the meat’s reputation as a fatty protein. The Other White Meat campaign was developed to position pork as a good-tasting, versatile and nutritious meat that is easy to prepare and appropriate for any meal.

Since its inception, the campaign has gained tremendous recognition from consumers. In 2000, a study conducted by Northwestern University found The Other White Meat brand to be the fifth most memorable promotional tagline in the history of contemporary advertising.

“The NPPC enjoys the strong support of pork producers nationwide,” Maschhoff said. “Regardless of the final outcome in this case, we are well positioned to continue fighting for the livelihood of farmers and others in rural America.”

2/14/2018