The recent Crumbl Cookie pop-up event in Sydney has caused much controversy and debate. Attendees thought they were buying cookies from the viral U.S. brand Crumbl, only to find out later that the event was run by unaffiliated fans who brought the cookies in from Hawaii. This revelation has led to discussions about trademark and consumer protection law violations. In this blog, we’ll look at the legal consequences of this event and the boundaries of Australian trademark law and consumer rights regarding misleading advertising.
Promoted through TikTok and other social media platforms, the pop-up event marketed itself with the message “Crumbl is landing in Australia.” The branding and messaging, nearly identical to the official U.S.-based Crumbl Cookies company, misled customers to believe they were participating in an official event. In reality, fans bought the cookies from a Crumbl store in Hawaii and flew them to Sydney. However, they were several days old, and some customers lined up for hours and paid up to $150 for disappointing cookies, resulting in widespread disappointment and accusations of misleading conduct.
The event organizers, however, said they never meant to deceive anyone and did not explicitly claim to be affiliated with the U.S. company. While Crumbl has not pursued legal action, this incident highlights issues of trademark infringement and consumer protection laws in Australia.
It’s legal under Australian law to sell imported goods like those in the Crumbl pop-up as long as the reseller isn’t pretending to be the brand or confusing customers. Parallel import is the term used to describe goods legally imported into Australia without the original manufacturer or brand's permission. However, the key legal issue in this case revolves around the branding and promotion of the pop-up event.
Trademark law helps businesses protect their intellectual property by ensuring no one uses their branding, logos, or other identifiers without permission. In this case, the organizers used branding and messaging nearly identical to Crumbl’s, such as “Crumbl cookies are landing” and “coming to Australia,” which could be seen as a deliberate attempt to associate the event with Crumbl's official branding. According to Australian trademark law, this could constitute trademark infringement if it is determined that the organizers used Crumbl's branding in a way that could confuse or mislead consumers into believing the pop-up was an official event.
Legal expert Professor Michael Handler from the University of New South Wales said that using near identical or deceptively similar branding may breach trademark laws. It is legal to sell parallel imports, but resellers cannot pretend to be the original brand’s representatives. Here, Crumbl’s use of its trademark on TikTok and in the pop-up location perhaps went too far and constituted trademark infringement.
In addition to trademark concerns, the incident raises potential issues under Australian consumer law. Misleading and deceptive conduct in trade or commerce is prohibited by the Australian Consumer Law (ACL). Sydney influencer Elle Salagaras, who thought she was buying freshly baked cookies from Crumbl, may have a case to argue the pop-up’s promotion misled her. The ad gave the impression of being an official ad from Crumbl, leading customers to think they were buying products from the source and at a premium price.
The organizers’ defense that they never said they were affiliated with Crumbl might not hold up if it can be proven that their promotional content had the potential to mislead a reasonable consumer. The fact that the organizers used Crumbl's pink branding and posted TikTok videos that featured Crumbl's social media content could strengthen the argument that they intentionally created the perception of an official event, even if they never outright stated it.
The controversy surrounding the Crumbl Cookie pop-up highlights the complex intersection between and consumer protection regulation. The sale of imported goods isn't illegal, but using branding and promotional tactics similar to those of a well-known company can have serious legal consequences. In this case, however, Crumblr has decided not to take legal action, but the event organizers could still face scrutiny under Australian law for potentially misleading consumers.
Businesses and individuals considering similar ventures should know what legal boundaries surround parallel imports and trademark use. Misleading advertising, even if unintentional, can result in legal disputes and damage to reputation.
If you believe you’ve encountered a situation similar to this or need advice on trademark and consumer protection issues, it’s important to consult with a legal professional to ensure you are operating within the law.
