False or Misleading Statements. 4I the product, the quantity or proportion of such color or preservative should be stated. It is not usually of material importance to the purchaser that he be informed of the locality of origin of the article offered him or of the name of the manufacturer. A standard drug product or medicinal preparation is hardly likely to be modified in character by climatic or other local conditions, or by a particular manufacturer, and the same is generally true of food products and it is not, therefore, material that the locality of origin or the name of the manufacturer should be stated on the label. But if either is stated it is fairly to be assumed that in the particular case the locality of origin or the name of the manufacturer has a distinct bearing upon the character or quality of the product, and if stated should be correctly stated. Pictorial matter on a label may be calculated to convey a false impression as to the character or quality of the contents of the package as, for instance, if pictures of honey bees or beehives are placed upon packages containing imitation or adulterated honey, or if pictures of maple leaves or maple sugar camps are placed upon syrups or sugars which are not pure maple, or if pictures of coffee plants or coffee plantations are placed on preparations that are not pure coffee. All such pictorial representations, designs or devices are clearly prohibited under this paragraph of Section 8.63 With regard to drugs, particularly proprietary remedies, the rulings of the Department of Agriculture are likely to be strict as to what constitutes a false or misleading statement as to the quality. A statement on a package or label that the preparation is a "cure" for the disease for the treatment of which it is offered, is more than likely to be considered misbranding, particularly if the diseases which the preparation is stated to "cure" are generally considered to be incurable. The use of the words "Remedy for" instead of "cure" is understood to be permissible. Page 78. Statements on packages or labels which assert for the preparation curative properties beyond what is warranted by actual fact are likely to be deemed false and misleading. 40. MISBRANDING TRADEMARKS. The fact that a design or device used on a package or label has been registered as a trademark is not sufficient to warrant its use in any manner which is calculated to deceive. It is well settled by numerous decisions that the courts will not protect trademarks or labels, whether registered or not, which are deceptive as to the character or quality of the goods on which they are used. The language of this paragraph is clearly capable of being construed to prohibit the use on a package or label of a "design" or "device" which is a counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation of a trademark which is recognized in the trade as distinguishing the goods of another manufacturer or dealer. The importance to the public of prohibiting a dishonest manufacturer or dealer from passing off his goods, probably inferior, as goods which are well known to be of superior character or quality, by so marking them that the purchaser will be deceived, is not less than the importance of prohibiting the use of false indications of origin 41. MISBRANDING-NAME OF MANUFACTURER-FICTI- The name of the manufacturer need not be stated on the label. If stated at all it must be correctly stated. If the name of any person, firm, or corporation not actually the manufacturer appears on a label without words indicating that such name is not to be understood as the name of the manufacturer, the goods may be held to be misbranded. The name of the wholesaler, jobber, agent, importer, distributor or retailer may appear on the label, provided it is accompanied by words like "packed for," "distributed by," "importer," "agent," which will indicate that the name which appears is not to be understood as purporting to be the name of the manufacturer. There is nothing in the Act which is intended to restrict the use of private brands or to require the name of the actual manufacturer or packer to appear on the label provided the name of the owner of the private brand, who is not the manufacturer or packer, is not so used as to falsely indicate that he is the manufacturer or packer. While, as regards the name of the manufacturer, the Act does not expressly prohibit the use of fictitious names on labels, and while fictitious names are not expressly mentioned in the Rules and Regulations, there is no doubt that the Department of Agriculture will construe the language of the Act to prohibit the use, on foods or drugs, of any fictitious name which purports to be the name of the manufacturer. The language of the Act is clearly capable of this construction and there is no doubt that in case of certain food products, particularly olive oil, fictitious names and false indications of origin have been used to pass off upon the public inferior goods. It is not clear that the use of fictitious names by packers of canned goods in this country to indicate a grade of their goods inferior to the goods put out under their proper names, has actually deceived the public. But whether actually deceptive or not, it is clear that the use of fictitious names on any food or drug products will not be permitted, and, as it is probable that the Department of Agriculture would be sustained in its position by the courts, it is advisable that the use of fictitious names on food or drug products should be discontinued. It should, however, be understood that a name which a manufacturer or packer has the right to use as successor or assignee is not to be considered a fictitious name. 42. MISBRANDING-FALSE INDICATION OF ORIGIN. There is nothing in the Act which requires the name of the State, Territory or country in which an article of food or drug is manufactured or produced, to be stated on the package or on the label, except in case of mixtures or compounds having a distinctive name. If stated, the name of the State, Territory or country is required to be correctly stated. In many foreign countries certain localities have become noted for the production of certain food products which are peculiarly dependent for their character upon the character of the soil or climatic conditions, and the same is true of certain localities in the United States. Many of the States are noted in the matter of food products for some one or more products which, while perhaps capable of being produced in other States, are at their best in that State. Vermont Maple Syrup, Maine Canned Corn, New York Canned Fruits, Delaware Peaches, Baltimore Oysters, Cape Cod Cranberries, Smithfield Hams, Kentucky Whiskey, Elgin Butter, Indian River Oranges, are all food products which by reason of the efforts of the producers in the localities indicated are generally recognized on the market as distinctive products commanding the higher prices. In the wine producing countries of Europe names of certain localities like Champagne, Cognac, Burgundy, Port, Tokay, Moselle and others, applied to products characteristic of the particular locality, indicate, when properly used, products which are of the highest excellence and command the highest prices. So also Java or Mocha for coffee. Such geographical names are in the nature of trademarks differing from trademarks in the ordinary sense in that the right to use them belongs not to an individual but to the producers located within a certain region. By students of trademark law they are termed "Regional Marks" or "Collective Marks," and in many foreign countries their use is protected by law as strictly as is the use of individual trademarks, such protection being afforded both as a protection to the public against deception and as a protection of a recognized property right in the mark. The protection of these regional marks, collective marks or indications of origin as they are variously termed has been frequently the False Indication of Origin. 45 subject of treaty arrangements between foreign countries. France, Great Britain, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, Brazil and Tunis are parties to an agreement concluded at Madrid April 14, 1891, having for its express purpose the suppression of false indications of origin. On account of the fact that certain geographical names used by the producers within certain regions to indicate the origin of their products have been so extensively used by imitators that they are, sometimes at least, understood as indicating a type or style of product without regard to its source, it is provided in paragraph (c) of Regulation 1964 that the use of such geographical names will not be deemed misbranding if the State or Territory where the article is produced is stated, and if the geographical name is used to indicate style, type or brand. "Tokay style, California," "Champagne style, New York," or like markings will probably be permitted in cases of wines which resemble the genuine Tokay or the genuine Champagne. Where a geographical name indicates locality of origin only, and is not understood as indicating a type or style, its use on an article of food or drug not produced in the region indicated will be misbranding. The name Java on coffee will no doubt be deemed a misbranding if used upon Brazilian coffee or on any coffee not imported from Java or at least from the region in which Java is located. Geographical names which do not indicate the origin of the product to which they are applied but are used merely as indicating a species or variety, such names for instance. as Delaware grapes, Concord grapes, and the like, are properly used when applied to the products known by these names wherever grown or produced. The wording of the first paragraph of Section 865 would seem to require a manufacturer or packer having plants located in several States and using on his labels the address of his main office, to indicate on goods packed in a State |