As a consumer, I have two dichotomous views in this.
1) its silly. No, cadbury doesn't own that shade of colour
2) i really want to know I have a product made by the real entity, not brand substitution under-the-hood or fraudulent supply.
I don't actually think 2) demands 1) be made somehow true. I don't think IPR law really works overall, its a very illiberal broad-brush comment but the generality here is that "owning" ideas and expressions is really counter-productive in the wide, and if colour is expressive, then owning it is a very odd idea.
1) its silly. No, cadbury doesn't own that shade of colour
2) i really want to know I have a product made by the real entity, not brand substitution under-the-hood or fraudulent supply.
I don't actually think 2) demands 1) be made somehow true. I don't think IPR law really works overall, its a very illiberal broad-brush comment but the generality here is that "owning" ideas and expressions is really counter-productive in the wide, and if colour is expressive, then owning it is a very odd idea.