> I just had a look at the Milka case, btw. While I still feel that she was in 
> her right, I see that she asked 25000 euros because Kraft "tattooed a cow in 
> mauve, thus slandering her name" and another 25000 because of the 
> "commercial usage of a degrading image that she was identified with" 
> (presumably the mauve cow named Milka). This was pretty stupid and I can 
> understand that a judge would find her arguments frivolous.

First time I read this.  If true, probably the idea of a stupid lawyer trying
to counter-attack Kraft in a last attempt, in front of incompetent judges.

BTW, I stopped buying anything named "milka", and mostly (hard, because they

anything produced by Kraft, since it happened.

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message