Behind every “planet-positive” product wrapped in plastic lies the fascinating paradox of greenwashing—where marketing promises grow faster than bamboo but stand on foundations about as sturdy as a soggy paper straw. Welcome to the messy jungle of environmental branding, where not everything labeled clean actually is.

Greenwashing represents the dangerous intersection where trademark law meets environmental claims. Companies build entire brand identities around sustainability without the substance to back them up. However, regulators worldwide are fighting back. The FTC’s Green Guides in the US, the EU’s Green Claims Directive, and similar regulations globally are creating serious consequences for hollow eco-promises.

The casualties of this crackdown are numerous and notable. Volkswagen’s “Clean Diesel” campaign resulted in $30 billion in fines when emissions-cheating devices were discovered. H&M’s “Conscious Collection” faced lawsuits for being mostly fast fashion with minimal sustainable materials. Coca-Cola promotes recycling while consistently ranking as the world’s top plastic polluter. Even financial giants like Goldman Sachs have paid millions for overstating the sustainability of their ESG funds.

The distinction between legitimate certification marks (like Forest Stewardship Council or Energy Star) and self-created eco-labels has become a crucial battleground. When SC Johnson invented its own “GreenList” logo, consumers assumed third-party verification that didn’t exist. The resulting lawsuit demonstrates how sustainability can’t be fabricated through clever branding alone.

For those navigating these green waters, specificity and transparency offer the safest passage. Vague terms like “eco-friendly” invite scrutiny, while precise statements backed by evidence build lasting trust. As trademark lawyers, marketers and entrepreneurs, our challenge is clear: align intellectual property with genuine sustainability, not just environmental aesthetics.

Ready to sharpen your eco-radar and spot corporate green shenanigans? Subscribe now and join us in exploring how intellectual property shapes our world—from the products we buy to the promises we believe. Because in both IP and sustainability, authenticity always outlasts imitation.

Playing Around INTA 2026: A Scenario Game for IP Lawyers – Intangiblia™

We’re in London at the INTA 2026 Annual Meeting, but we’re not doing a standard conference recap. We wanted to show how intellectual property work can be creative, inventive, and even fun, so we built THE INVENTIVE MINDSET GAME, a scenario game, and handed real IP lawyers a stack of tricky client prompts.Each prompt forces a choice: do you follow the client’s exact instructions, take an inventive counseling path, bring in an AI assist tool, or throw a curveball and plan for the worst-case scenario. From a smart home invention to a viral character and an influencer launching a skincare line, we dig into the practical decisions behind patent strategy, trademark protection, and copyright, including how to think about prior art, claim scope, brand control, and what “commercialization” actually demands.We also talk about the unglamorous but critical details that can make or break an IP strategy: picking the right trademark classes, avoiding coverage that doesn’t match the business, and sequencing filings when budgets are tight. If you’re a founder, creator, in-house counsel, or just curious about how IP law works in the real world, you’ll leave with clearer mental models and sharper questions to ask before you file anything.Subscribe for more stories and practical IP insights, share this with a friend building a brand, and leave a review if the game format helped you think differently about IP. What would you choose first: safe, inventive, AI-assisted, or curveball?Send us Fan MailCheck out "Protection for the Inventive Mind" – available now on Amazon in print and Kindle formats.The views and opinions expressed (by the host and guest(s)) in this podcast are strictly their own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the entities with which they may be affiliated. This podcast should in no way be construed as promoting or criticizing any particular government policy, institutional position, private interest or commercial entity. Any content provided is for informational and educational purposes only.

1. Playing Around INTA 2026: A Scenario Game for IP Lawyers 08:56
2. Sports As IP Strategy 15:15
3. The Afterlife of Innovation: Can IP Outlive the Business That Created It? 19:44
4. Case Study: Lindt’s Gold Bunny Trademark Saga 22:40
5. What Kind of Negotiator Are You, Really? 39:39