Snack food giant Mondelez sues Aldi in US over ‘look alike’ packaging on own-label products

Mondelez International has launched a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, alleging that Aldi – famous in the UK for its “like brands, only cheaper” advertising slogan – is using packaging for own label products that “blatantly copies” many of the snack food giant’s biscuit and cracker brands.

In the lawsuit, Mondelez lists seven brands alongside pictures of what it claims are the relevant Aldi ‘copy-cat’ products. The seven brands are Oreo and Ritz (probably the best-known in the UK), Chips Ahoy cookies, Wheat Thins crackers, Nutter Butter peanut butter sandwich biscuits, Nilla vanilla wafers, and Premium crackers.

Mondelez claims that Aldi is infringing the ‘trade dress’ of all of these. Its filing states: “Consumers instantly recognize snacks sold under these popular food brands through their highly distinctive product packaging… Defendant’s business model involves an emphasis on low-priced private label products that resemble the look and feel of well-known brands. For this reason, Defendant is often referred to as a ‘discount’ supermarket. Defendant is well known for its television advertisements featuring the slogan ‘like brands, only cheaper.’”

Mondelez points out in the court documents that it has repeatedly had to enforce its intellectual property rights against Aldi ‘clones’, with some success; however, the filing goes on, “defendant has continued its pattern and practice of selling products in packaging which infringes the trade dress of numerous Mondelēz products,” including the ones listed in this lawsuit.

Mondelez is not the first brand owner to sue Aldi, although it may be the biggest so far.

In the UK in January 2025, as Inngot reported in Aldi hit by court rulings that it copied brand packaging, UK alcoholic drinks company Thatchers won a case in the Appeals Court over its claim for trade mark infringement over similarities in the packaging of its cloudy lemon cider drink and Aldi’s Taurus product. This overturned an earlier ruling in the UK’s Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) where the judge had found that there was a low degree of similarity between Thatchers' mark and Aldi's product, meaning that there was no real likelihood of confusion.

The 2025 Appeals Court in the Thatchers case found the IPEC ruling was flawed. Notably, the judgement, drafted by Lord Justice Arnold, made much of the fact that Aldi gave its design company the Thatchers imagery to use as a reference point and suggested “close imitation”.

The judgement goes on: “The inescapable conclusion is that Aldi intended the Sign to remind consumers of the Trade Mark. This can only have been in order to convey the message that the Aldi Product was like the Thatchers Product, only cheaper. To that extent, Aldi intended to take advantage of the reputation of the Trade Mark in order to assist it to sell the Aldi Product.”

Aldi filed an appeal in the Thatchers case to the UK Supreme Court; but the Supreme Court refused the appeal.

Aldi also lost a court case in Australia where a Federal Court judge ruled at the end of 2024 that Aldi infringed copyright on three baby food products made by Hampden Holdings. The judge described Aldi’s conduct in the infringing designs as “flagrant”. Click here for the Guardian’s report on the case.

And back in the UK, soft drinks company Robinsons filed a claim in the High Court on 19 March 2025 accusing the discounter of trademark infringement and passing off.