The aim of these articles is to keep our Clients and Associates updated about developments in the sector of Intellectual Property in general and our firm in particular. In this way, we wish to provide a broader view of the tools that the field of trade marks, domain names, patents, designs and related rights offers to entrepreneurs to enhance and protect their efforts in researching and developing new solutions and ideas.
The “Meat Sounding”
When Food Communication Becomes Essential and How to Avoid Trademark Rejection
The plant-based food market has seen significant growth recently. From "veggie burgers" to "tofu sausages," a growing number of consumers are opting for these products for ethical, health, and environmental reasons.
Various market research studies have found that retail sales of five plant-based food categories (meat, milk, cheese, yogurt, and cream alternatives) in supermarkets and discount stores in Italy reached €639 million in 2024, an increase of 16.4% compared to 2022 and 7.6% compared to 2023.
The Italian market for plant-based foods therefore appears to be booming, and the plant-based consumer base seems to have expanded well beyond the confines of vegetarians and vegans. In this niche, private label products are gaining significant ground: between 2022 and 2024, sales grew by 17.4%, reaching more than half the market by 2024.
Thus, the so-called practice of “ meat sounding” has taken hold, that is, the use of terms typical of meat (such as "sausage", "burger", "steak") to label plant-based, vegan or synthetic alternatives to it, therefore, for products that do not contain meat but derive from soy, legumes, cereals or other plant-based sources.
Opponents of this practice argue that the use of such terms is aimed at exploiting product recognition and increasing sales, while simultaneously reducing the market share held by the traditional sector.
At the same time, it is argued that incorrect nutritional information is also provided: consumers may believe that plant-based chicken is nutritionally equivalent to real chicken.
Indeed, one of the most thorny aspects of this practice is linked to doubts about the transparency of communication and consumers' right to information.
In addition to meat companies, farmers themselves have lobbied national governments and the European Union to ensure the protection of typical meat names. They argue that terms like "steak," "wing," or "bacon" should be reserved exclusively for animal products, to protect tradition and ensure clear information for consumers.
Given the controversial nature of this practice and the pressure it has received, the European institutions have decided to intervene to protect consumers from potential misleading practices.
On July 16, 2025, the European Commission presented a proposal to amend Regulation (EU) 1308/2013 on the common organization of the markets. Among the various proposed provisions, it is proposed to reserve the use of 29 terms, including "steak," "bacon," "chicken," "rib," "wing," or "sausage," to describe foods made from meat or derived exclusively from meat.
The report accompanying the proposal indicates that the ban has two main objectives. The first one is political in nature and reflects the European Commission's desire to support the EU livestock sector, considered a key component of EU agriculture, characterized by high standards that are often not adequately compensated on the market. The second objective concerns consumer protection: the Commission believes that meat-related terms have significant cultural and historical value and protecting them ensures greater transparency and clarity for product buyers.
In this scenario, it is advisable to pay particular attention to the choice of a trademark.
In fact, it is not possible to register trademarks that could mislead the consumer regarding the food nature of the product to which they refer.
For example, the trademark “ Veggiemett ”, registered in the European Union for “ meat, fish, poultry and game, in particular sausage and ham products; meat extracts ”, was refused by the EUIPO (European Union Intellectual Property Office) because “ for the German-speaking public, ‘Veggie’ is understood as an indication of purely vegetable ingredients, or of purely vegetable origin, and ‘mett’ is understood as a meat product consisting specifically of mince. The overall message of the sign is meat-free variants of the food product (…). A German-speaking consumer could erroneously assume that it involves a vegetarian foodstuff”.
The trademark " JUST EGG" for "plant-based egg substitute; liquid egg substitute; plant-based processed food" was also rejected by the EUIPO: consumers, including those without strict dietary guidelines, would have risked purchasing the products under the belief that they were eggs or egg-based products (hen's eggs), and not alternatives. The sign would therefore have been capable of deceiving the public about the nature of the products.
Therefore, when choosing the name under which a food product is to be marketed, it is always advisable – on the one hand – to ensure that it is not descriptive (i.e. that it does not evoke the claimed product) and – on the other hand – to ensure that it cannot mislead the consumer about the characteristics of the product, its composition, its contents and its nutritional properties.
Our professionals are available to provide further information and to assess any potential issues related to the descriptiveness or misleading nature of the names chosen for identifying products.