![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I'm not one for legal wonkery, but this is pretty wonderful on a variety of levels: it turns out you can't actually sue the makers of Cap'n Crunch because you led to believe that crunchberries were real fruit. Which is awesome enough on its own, but the details are golden:
The plaintiff, Janine Sugawara, alleged that she had only recently learned to her dismay that said "berries" were in fact simply brightly-colored cereal balls, and that although the product did contain some strawberry fruit concentrate, it was not otherwise redeemed by fruit.
"Otherwise redeemed by fruit" is quickly worming its way into my heart as one of the best turns of phrase I've read in a long time.
According to the complaint, Sugawara and other consumers were misled not only by the use of the word "berries" in the name, but also by the front of the box, which features the product's namesake, Cap'n Crunch, aggressively "thrusting a spoonful of 'Crunchberries' at the prospective buyer."
Say what you will of the plaintiff's intellectual capacities, but whoever crafted the "thrusting a spoonful" bit has earned my respect. "Thrusting Spoonful" goes atop my list of hypothetical band names.
But to put this entire debacle in context, the final graf from the blog entry:
Judge England also noted another federal court had "previously rejected substantially similar claims directed against the packaging of Fruit Loops [sic] cereal, and brought by these same Plaintiff attorneys." He found that their attack on "Crunchberries" should fare no better than their prior claims that "Froot Loops" did not contain real froot.
The plaintiff, Janine Sugawara, alleged that she had only recently learned to her dismay that said "berries" were in fact simply brightly-colored cereal balls, and that although the product did contain some strawberry fruit concentrate, it was not otherwise redeemed by fruit.
"Otherwise redeemed by fruit" is quickly worming its way into my heart as one of the best turns of phrase I've read in a long time.
According to the complaint, Sugawara and other consumers were misled not only by the use of the word "berries" in the name, but also by the front of the box, which features the product's namesake, Cap'n Crunch, aggressively "thrusting a spoonful of 'Crunchberries' at the prospective buyer."
Say what you will of the plaintiff's intellectual capacities, but whoever crafted the "thrusting a spoonful" bit has earned my respect. "Thrusting Spoonful" goes atop my list of hypothetical band names.
But to put this entire debacle in context, the final graf from the blog entry:
Judge England also noted another federal court had "previously rejected substantially similar claims directed against the packaging of Fruit Loops [sic] cereal, and brought by these same Plaintiff attorneys." He found that their attack on "Crunchberries" should fare no better than their prior claims that "Froot Loops" did not contain real froot.
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
agressively thrusting a spoonful just simply must be worked into my regular vocabulary now!
From:
no subject
This ranks up there with listing decapitation as a contraindication for CPR. How the fuck do you do CPR if the person HAS NO HEAD??? The only reason that is listed- cause someone tried doing CPR on a headless person...
People need to learn basic reading and common sense.
From:
no subject
Dear Mister Language Person: I am curious about the expression, "Part of this complete breakfast". The way it comes up is, my 5-year-old
will be watching TV cartoon shows in the morning, and they'll show a commercial for a children's compressed breakfast compound such as "Froot Loops" or "Lucky Charms", and they always show it sitting on a table next to some actual food such as eggs, and the announcer always says: "Part of this complete breakfast". Don't that really mean,
"Adjacent to this complete breakfast", or "On the same table as this complete breakfast"? And couldn't they make essentially the same claim
if, instead of Froot Loops, they put a can of shaving cream there, or a dead bat?
Answer: Yes.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Just curious, what other contraindications for CPR are there that aren't also contraindications for, well, being alive? I imagine serious chest trauma is one....
I'd like to examine the plaintiff's other legal challenges, if they've been confident enough in their insipidy to go to the wall over Froot Loops and crunchberries. Even I figured out that, despite what the box said (and the box DID say it), the hourglass marshmallows in Lucky Charms did not, in fact, give you the ability to control and manipulate time.
From:
no subject
We had a guy in class who kept failing CPR. Why? He kept forgetting to check for a pulse! Doing CPR on live people=BAD.
Serious chest trauma is not one. Most laypeople aren't going to start CPR on a goopy body though. I however have done CPR on a person with serious chest trauma. It does remain high on my list of experiences not to repeat.
Do Not Resuscitate orders are another. Obvious signs of rigour mortis, danger to rescuers, dependant lividity, and frozen chest (cause you can make a serious mess).
But not having a head is always a personal favorite. :) It's technically absolute signs of no life ie decapitation. Now having no contents IN the chest- that would be an issue...
From:
no subject
Now you sound like my parole officer. Though everything else sounds perfectly reasonable. I guess. Hard for me to get into the mindset of a first responder instead of an instigator.
From:
no subject
But... if one looks at that picture of Cap'n Crunch aggressively thrusting Crunchberries in your face (dare you to not hear "unf unf unf" in your head next time you see a box), could one not see that the "crunchberries" are not actual berries?
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
You know, I remember when I was a kid I could drink for the garden hose, ride in the back of a pickup truck, climb trees and ride my bicycle without haveing all these THOU SHALT NOTs flying around. I never got sick from drinking from the garden hose, I never was thrown from the back of the pickup truck, I never fell from the tree... ok, I DID fall off my bicycle and skin my knees, but that was being a kid! BFD! You know, I'm 47 years old and all winter I've been thinking about getting a bicycle. And NO I'm not thinking about getting a helmet or football padding. I fall off the thing it's my own damned fault. Period! I also cross at the corners, use the crosswalks, stop when the light says so and look both ways before crossing the street (even if I DO have the green light. I'm not stupid.) It's sad to say this, but the problem with people nowadays is they don't feel like they have to take reaponsibility for their actions. Only losers fail to take responsibility for their own actions. If that makes me a dinosaur than I'm proud to be one.
From:
no subject
People really do need to think about personal responsibility, actions and consequences, riding the bicycle without training wheels (says the woman who has such poor balance that she can only ride a three-wheel bike). But you know what I mean. Kids NEED to learn how to fall and how to pick themselves up.
My husband would perform stupid bike stunts as a kid. He'd scrape skin off his face, break fingers and toes, mangle the bike... and get up, tend to his wounds, and do it again later. His parents would help him with the bandages, say "What have we learned?" and carefully watch to make sure he didn't break his skull.
He went on to do volunteer EMT and lifeguard work, was trained by a master martial artist, knows how to stitch a wound, extract a bullet, set a bone, stop and start a heart, skin a deer, and understand the female mind.
What's with the helicopter parents today?
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I have another one...Fruity Pebbles. Who wouldn't want to eat fruit flavored rocks?