This. For all the shit that people give Silicon Valley, Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods are both going to have a huge positive impact on the world. Already they're as good or better than all but the very best meat-based burgers.
Britannica link (it seems to be more comprehensive than Wikipedia): https://www.britannica.com/story/a-brief-history-of-food-lib...
Do they though? I mean here look at this [1]. It totally supports your point, "Plant-Based" is front and center in big green letters.
But what about this product? [2]
And what about this one? [3]
And this one? It says Real Meat right at the top. [4]
And these are going in the meat aisle? Right next to real, actual meat? This is blatant false advertising and consumers are going to be tricked by these products.
>Banning words like "beef" and "meat" from the packaging sounds like something that would actually engender confusion among consumers, by effectively banning phrases like "meat free" from the packaging.
Oh come on, get real. This wouldn't be a problem if "PLANT-BASED" actually was front and center on all of these products.
>This whole effort reads to me as a rather blatant example of rent seeking behavior on the part of an incumbent industry in response to new entrants to the market.
Well you're welcome to read whatever you want into it. I'd really like to see you defend those beef crumbles though. What if those chicken strips are right next to actual chicken strips? You don't think some consumer fresh off work or wrangling a kid or what have you is going to grab them thinking they're actual meat products? Of course they are.
[1] https://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Meat-Burger-0-5/dp/B074YGZ77H
[2] https://www.walmart.com/ip/Beyond-Meat-Beyond-Beef-Crumbles-...
[3] https://www.walmart.com/ip/Beyond-Meat-Beast-Burger/13728403...
[4] https://www.walmart.com/ip/Beyond-Meat-Chicken-Grilled-Strip...
That said, I'd still say those are cases that are much better handled by lodging a false advertising complaint with the FTC. Dealing with that one company using the existing legal and regulatory channels is fine, and they're well-known enough that it would probably put anyone else who's thinking of doing similar on notice.
Dealing with that by using them as an excuse to engage in crony capitalism in order to pass an over-expansive law that is clearly designed to distort the market is not OK. Crony capitalism in general is not OK.
It really isn't, though, in practice. All these products have packaging that is designed to make them immediately recognizable as plant-based products. They want, first and foremost, to be attractive to their core market: Vegetarians. They may make other overtures in an effort to attract people who do eat meat, but those invariably involve trying to sell their being plant-based as a thing that makes them a healthier product. Even the Beyond Meat brand, which is the one that skirts the closest to being deceptive here, by virtue of their name, still has "PLANT-BASED XXXX" written front, center, and in large contrasting color letters on the packaging of their products.
Banning words like "beef" and "meat" from the packaging sounds like something that would actually engender confusion among consumers, by effectively banning phrases like "meat free" from the packaging.
This whole effort reads to me as a rather blatant example of rent seeking behavior on the part of an incumbent industry in response to new entrants to the market.