The High-Stakes Fight Over Aldi Snack Packaging

Last week, Mondelēz International filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against the grocery store chain Aldi, alleging sweeping trademark infringements of their packaging.

Mondelēz, formerly known as Kraft Foods, owns a wide variety of snack brands including Oreo, Chips Ahoy, Wheat Thins and Nutter Butter. According to the lawsuit, Aldi markets its store versions of these products using packaging that is confusingly similar to Mondelēz’s, which harms and dilutes Mondelēz’s brands.

The lawsuit claims that Aldi’s products are “unacceptable copies” of their brands. Mondelēz filed the lawsuit in Illinois, the location of Mondelez International’s main headquarters and Aldi’s US headquarters.

Aldi has not responded to the lawsuit. However, this isn’t the first time Aldi has faced a lawsuit over its packaging.

In December 2024, an Australian court found Aldi liable for copyright infringement of packaging “Baby Bellis” snack packages. That case was unusual as it dealt solely with copyright issues, not trademark ones.

The very next month, a UK Court of Appeal also ruled against Aldi. In that case, they faced allegations of trademark infringement of Thatchers Cloudy Lemon Cider packaging. Although the High Court sided with Aldi, the Appeals Court overturned its decision.

However, this latest lawsuit likely represents the biggest threat to Aldi and its business model. To understand why, we only need to look at the companies involved.

A Major Battle

Sometimes a case isn’t important because of the issues it raises, but because of the parties involved. That is true here.

Mondelēz International is a major snack food company. They have over $36 billion in annual revenue and own many of the world’s largest international brands. In addition to the ones mentioned in this lawsuit, they also own Triscuit, Ritz, Belvita and Trident, to name a few.

Aldi is a major international grocery chain, and according to their statement, it is the fastest-growing one in the United States.

Aldi Süd, the company that operates Aldi locations in the United States, generates annual revenue of over $86 billion.

This is a rare battle of two industry giants. And it is an issue that has been festering on grocery store shelves for years. Although Aldi has become the lightning rod for this issue, numerous other companies, including virtually all grocery stores, market “knock-off” brands that the outcome of this case could impact.

It could be one of the most critical trademark cases in a very long time, especially if it goes before a judge and/or jury.

The Issue at Hand

The issue at hand is relatively straightforward. Mondelēz argues that Aldi’s packaging for their knock-off products is too similar to theirs. They argue that the names, colors and other elements will cause confusion with their brands.

But this isn’t a new issue. Aldi, as a grocery store, is somewhat unusual in that it favors store brands over name brands. According to a report in Supermarket News, roughly 90% of the items in Aldi’s store are its private brands. This makes up over three-quarters of their sales.

This puts it well ahead of other supermarkets, including Costco, Sam’s Club and Walmart, all of which are famous for their store brands. Even Trader Joe’s, which is owned by Aldi Nord, a company that split from Aldi Süd in 1960, has fewer private label brands.

But Aldi’s practice is nothing new. Why is Mondelēz filing the lawsuit now? The reason, most likely, is that they feel Aldi is vulnerable.

Why Now?

Although the case has likely been in the works for some time, Aldi’s recent legal defeats make the timing opportune for Mondelēz.

Of the two cases, the December one is likely the most important. First, it was a copyright, not a trademark case. This meant that the plaintiffs had a higher bar they had to meet. Despite that, the court found in the plaintiff’s favor.

Second, the case focused heavily on Aldi’s relationship with graphic design contractor Motor Design. The case made it clear that Aldi provided the original designs to their contractor and that, at least on one occasion, rejected a design for being “too close” to the source material.

In response to that, Motor Design sent a strongly worded email that read:

“Aldi have now had legal come back to them and state this design is too close to the benchmark – no shit!”

Undoubtedly, Mondelēz expects to find similar emails when they get discovery in their case. That would greatly help the argument that Aldi deliberately based their designs on the name brands they imitated and aimed to get as close as they felt they could.

Combine that with the UK Appeals Court siding with Thatchers, the timing is ripe for a bigger challenge in the United States. Mondelēz likely feels very confident in their case, and, given the recent results, they have good reason to.

Bottom Line

Whether you call them store brands, private label brands, knock-offs or imitations, such products have been a significant part of nearly all grocery stores’ shelves.

These products have always had to strike a balance. They need to indicate the product that they are imitating without crossing the line into trademark (or copyright) infringement.

Aldi has been pushing the envelope in that space. They’ve routinely created packages that ape colors, fonts, layouts and other details from the name brands. It seems that they may have overstepped.

Mondelēz sees blood in the water. Though this is the first significant case filed in the United States, it’s clear that Aldi’s Australian and UK defeats indicate to Mondelēz that Aldi is weak. There is likely at least some truth to that.

Obviously, the outcome of this case will have a significant impact on Aldi. They aren’t just the defendant, but they are the grocery chain most reliant on private label brands.

However, virtually all grocery stores rely on them to some degree. This could have knock-on effects for the entire industry and change the way private label brands promote themselves.

It’s a critical case to watch.