Yesterday I wrote about a British appellate court’s decision stating that Pringles are potato chips, despite the fact that lawyers from Procter & Gamble (Pringles’ parent) were arguing the contrary. (The case was about dollars and cents, not common sense.)
Seriously, what were the judges thinking?
Coming in flavors such as Mexican Layered Dip, Screamin’ Dill Pickle and Spicy Guacamole should be enough to disqualify Pringles from being considered potato chips (or food, for that matter).
However, I have a sneaking suspicion that the corporate lawyers were derelict and failed to present compelling evidence that would have swayed the judges in their favor, saving Procter & Gamble about $30 million per year.
The winning argument?
“Your Honor, how can Pringles be considered potato chips when they have their own distinct section in a New York City supermarket, separate from the potato chips?”