
Innocent Smoothies Packaging Design
Image source: Pearlfisher
As a member of the design community, or even just a fruit-juice consumer here in the UK, you would simply have had to have your head buried in the sand to not be aware of the design and branding for Innocent Smoothies. The simple and innovative brand conceived by Pearlfisher, made it’s first appearance on a juice stand at a music festival in London in the summer of 1998. Since then the company has gone from strength to strength, and the brand has undergone a refocusing and segmentation, maintaining the simplicity of the brand identity on the product packaging whilst allowing for strong differentiation between the various sub-brands and categories made by the company.
It’s often said that Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and it’s certainly been a running theme following the launch of many iconic brands in the last few years. Innovative design and branding often influences new generations of design and branding, but when do we need to draw the line? When is it an acceptable influence, and when does it owe more than simple inspiration?Here at Milestone Digital, we thought we’d have a look at a specific example. In 2003, the Australian company Nudie arrived on the fruit juice scene, driven by company founder Tim Pethick. Criticism quickly followed, especially when the brand began to gain international attention. Nudie founder Tim Pethick seemed surprised:
“I’ll be the first to admit that I draw inspiration from brands I’ve observed in the different markets I’ve been in the last 25 years. But I don’t think you can say that nudie is a complete copy of any one or two brands” “I’m biased, but personally, I think we’ve done a better job as a brand than Innocent, or even the Naked brand of juices from the US, whom we’ve been compared to as well,” he continues. “That’s simply because the intention was never to create nudie as just a juice brand, which they are, but I always wanted nudie to be an inspiration brand that would be able to stretch to other categories.” (source: brandchanel.com)
The similarities between Innocent and Nudie seem far too great to be a coincidence. The childlike innocence of the Nudie logo seems a direct reference to Innocent, and the similarity between product ranges is undeniable.

Nudie Crushes
Image source: www.nudie.com.au
Considering the level of criticism aimed at Nudie, I was surprised when reading a recent article on packaging blog theDieLine to find yet another example of what would seem a very similar brand identity for fruit juice from European fruit juice manufacturer Romantics in Spain:

Romantics Rebranding
Image source: theDieLine
In defense of the product, Smäll the agency responsible for the rebrand, has moved them quite significantly away from what was an uncomfortably similar design and branding. Even so, they seem to have opted for a bottle design almost identical to that of Innocent, and the product range, like Nudie is still seems amazingly similar.
How important are these design parallels? Should we be doing more to protect innovative brand identities, especially within the same consumer markets? After Apple’s experience with the iPhone and iPod, should we perhaps be putting into place more stringent rules, both on a national and international level to restrict such obvious parallels, whether pure coincidence or not?