Ben Gilbert

Yep.

And there is a famous 1920 case that went all the way to the Supreme Court.

There was a company called the Coke Company, K-O-K-E, that was insisting, actually, it's worth an aside here to say, at this point in time, Coca-Cola did not embrace the nickname Coke.

One, because of the affiliation with the drug.

And we should say by 1905, cocaine is pretty much entirely gone.

There's no more Coke in Coca-Cola.

Because they import it with cocaine in it still, right?

And I'm pretty sure the way that this ended up happening was the Hoover administration said, if federal agents are present on site and can supervise the destruction of the cocaine byproduct, then you can do this on American soil.

You can import the coca leaves, do this, create a giant pile of cocaine, and then we will watch you destroy it.

And that's still how they produce Coca-Cola.

Because the coca leaves, as much as the cocaine is gone, the coca leaf is still an important part of the formula.

So anyway, there's this 1920 case where Coke, K-O-K-E, is sort of tongue-in-cheek saying, what do you mean?

You guys aren't saying you're Coke.

So certainly we can be Coke.

And the other point they were making is Coca-Cola, you guys can't actually even use your trademark.

It's unprotectable since there's not really much Coca in it and all the cocaine's been removed.

So it's actually misleading.

False advertising.

You're misleading the public by saying that you are Coca or Cola.

You're not.