Milking it for all its worth:Supreme Court bans Oatly from using ‘milk’ in its branding

It’s hard to miss but if you’ve not already heard, the Supreme Court recently ruled that the company Oatly can no longer use the term ‘milk’ in marketing for their plant-based drinks.

After Oatly tried to trademark “post-milk generation” in the UK in 2021, Dairy UK, the representative body for British dairy farmers, objected. A long legal battle ensued and was concluded this week, with the Supreme Court ruling that Oatly cannot use the word ‘milk’ in its marketing. 

Dairy UK’s main argument hinged on the assertion that the term ‘milk’ can only apply to products which come from an animal, under trademark law. In the Supreme Court’s ruling, it stated that “post-milk generation” could lead to confusion over Oatly’s products and whether they are completely plant-based or partially contain dairy milk. 

Begging the question, what qualifies as milk and what’s the standard for branding things other than what they are? And what qualifies as misleading and confusing marketing?

‘Milk thistle’ is a plant. If we make a drink out of it, can it be called “Thistle Milk?” Or would that be too misleading and cause confusion to the same people who imagine that “Oat Milk” is a dairy product or “post-milk” may contain dairy, despite the “post” part of the title seeming to pretty clearly signify that it is dairy free.

Use of the word milk is used throughout literature to mean to extract something. Such as “The newspapers milked the story dry” or "Milk every moment for all the pleasure you can get from it."

Or "He who distributes the milk of human kindness cannot help but spill a little on himself." Or "The supply of the milk of human kindness was short by several gallons." How many people envisioned white secretions from a mammal upon hearing milk used in such phrases? 

Anyone who’s tried some ‘buffalo wings’ lately should know that buffalo don’t have wings (and that calling spicy fried chicken ‘buffalo’ does not make it so). 

Or how about some lovely dyed “sustainable” “organic” farmed salmon? Certainly more deceptive than ‘buffalo wings’ but a quick google search will show there’s nothing natural, humane or ‘sustainably sourced’ about so called ‘organic’ farmed salmon. Yet there it is on the package.

So why such a defiant backlash to Oatly and other plant-based alternatives to dairy using the word milk to imply an extraction process? 

Oatly’s UK and Ireland general manager, Bryan Carroll said “[t]his decision creates unnecessary confusion and an uneven playing field for plant-based products that solely benefits Big Dairy.”

The Supreme Court case is only one part of a wider movement by the meat and dairy industries to suppress the success of plant-based products. In October 2025, the European Parliament voted to ban the use of meat names for plant-based foods, a decision that is strikingly similar to the one Dairy UK has secured in the Supreme Court this week.

Animal Concern is troubled by the Supreme Court’s ruling, one which clearly favours the marketing revenue of industrial farming, where animals pay the ultimate price. 

Dairy UK’s objection was a clear push back from the dairy industry to try and stifle competition from brands providing alternatives to dairy milk. Given how the sales of cow milk are declining, in part due to increased awareness of how dairy cows are subject to a life of suffering from start to finish, it’s no wonder that they are making desperate bids to claim the word “milk” as their own. Maybe extracting suffering should be added to their milk labels instead.