There are indeed laws that prohibit people who manufacture alcohol from also being the ones who sell it to consumers. They're not selling it.
You can label things any damn way you want to label them, if you're not selling them. If you want to go home tonight and print out a label that says "Vinegar", and paste it on your Vodka bottle, I promise you won't be breaking any laws. If you then give that Vodka to your friend, you're still not breaking any laws, provided your friend is an adult.
The level of hysterical paranoia by other posters in this thread is confusing.
There are a multitude of laws governing alcohol. I had a friend host a party with a cover. He was giving away the alcohol. The local alcohol control board showed up and listed the numerous laws he was violating.
Don't forget that anyone who distributes alcohol has to be permitted. They need to comply with laws that govern access to the underaged, tracking of alcohol taxes, etc.
Here is an example from Missouri law:
When is a liquor license required? It is unlawful for any person to manufacture, distribute or sell intoxicating liquor without a state license issued by the state supervisor of the Division Alcohol and Tobacco Control. However, Section 311.055 is an exception, which allows 200 gallons to be manufactured per household, per calendar year if there are two or more persons over 21 years of age in the household, or 100 gallons per calendar year if there is one person over the age of 21 in the household. The products manufactured under the Section 311.055 exception are only for personal and family use.
> There are indeed laws that prohibit people who manufacture alcohol from also being the ones who sell it to consumers. They're not selling it.
They are offering it "in exchange for hosting a party on Speakeasy". Offering a product as in-kind exchange for something else of value very often is legally considered "selling" the product.
There are also laws prohibiting bottling alcohol by anyone other than the (properly licensed) manufacturer of the alcohol without a permit, and they were bottling it (and weren't the manufacturer).
If it was a donation to an individual, you could get away with ignoring the rules, but they're giving vodka away to businesses, knowing that the business likely intends on selling it.
There's already a ton of businesses who sell custom wine labels for you to use to relabel your own wine. The main customers of these companies are businesses who use them as gifts to their customers, as a form of marketing/advertising.
"in exchange for hosting a party on Speakeasy for our launch weekend"
imagine if someone dies from the vodka. who's liable for it?
If the only thing they did wrong was "failing to comply with regulations", then maybe those regulations are wrong. The same way that googling certain terms isn't wrong, putting labels on bottles of liquid isn't wrong. And, if someone comes to your door with guns in their hand because of this, then they're in the wrong - not you.
> You don't want to mess with the ATF. They are notorious for bringing down the hammer.
Wow, the tone people use to describe these various gov't agencies just keep making them sound more and more like common gangsters...
Tell that to a judge. You sound like you are 14 years old. If you run a business, you should follow the laws of the nation the best you can since employees, investors, partners, and customers all depend on you.
Laws are just incentive structures, and subject to the same risk analysis as everything else.
That's naive, it most certainly can be wrong and in this case it was. Alcohol regulations exist to protect the consumer and violating them is most definitely wrong.
However wrong these agencies might be, the OP has to face the consequences. My guess is the ATF might knock on his door and give him a lesson on alcohol regulations, nothing more, but at least he should be aware of what the potential consequences are.
Or state ABC authorities. If nothing else, liquor licensing is a pretty important revenue stream, and if nothing else (and there certainly is more) that's a pretty big motivation to not cut a lot of slack, especially for highly publicized violations.
You don't want to mess with the ATF. They are notorious for bringing down the hammer. Let's hope they don't go to their trust method of "Always Think Forfeiture"