2025: a turning point for Italian digital commerce
According to Netcomm, the past year has led to radical changes in Italian trade, which will inevitably impact 2026 and beyond.
Keep reading...In a landmark ruling that defends consumer rights, the Higher Regional Court of Cologne has officially prohibited Mina Merchandising GmbH, owned by TV personality Martin Rütter, from marketing synthetic products using the misleading term apple “leather.”
The decision, issued on July 4, 2025, follows a legal challenge initiated by the Verband der Deutschen Lederindustrie e.V. (VDL) – COTANCE member, after Mina Merchandising refused to comply with a warning over deceptive advertising of plastic-based dog collars labelled as apple “leather.” The court sided with VDL, confirming that the term “leather” may only be used when a product is made entirely or partially of animal hide.
The legal challenge, brought by the VDL, argued that labelling plastic-based products as apple “leather” misleads consumers and undermines the integrity of genuine leather. While a first-instance court rejected the claim, the Higher Regional Court overturned the decision on appeal, agreeing that the use of the term “apple leather” without actual leather content was deceptive and unlawful.
“This is more than just a win for the leather industry: it’s a win for consumers and truth in marketing. We are not against innovation, but we are against misleading labels that confuse buyers and devalue traditional, natural materials,” – said Gustavo Gonzalez-Quijano, Secretary General of COTANCE.
This ruling sends a strong message to all brands and marketers across the EU and beyond: materials derived from fruit waste, plastic, or synthetic compounds cannot be marketed as “leather”—a protected term that implies natural origin and a specific production process. The use of vague or greenwashed terms like vegan “leather” or apple “leather” risks violating consumer protection laws by misleading the public into believing they are purchasing an authentic, sustainable product.
“We are not opposed to new materials – but we do not want these materials to be referred to as leather in order to mislead consumers” – said Andreas Meyer, Managing Director of VDL.
The initial court ruling in 2024 dismissed VDL’s complaint, arguing that the color of the collar (blue) was enough to dispel confusion. However, on appeal, the Higher Regional Court rejected that logic and upheld the core argument: “leather” must mean leather. The judgment reaffirms that prefixes such as “apple,” “rhubarb,” or “cactus” do not justify misuse of the leather designation if no actual leather is present.
COTANCE applauds the persistent efforts of VDL in setting this legal precedent. As similar misleading practices grow across markets, this decision reinforces the urgent need for EU-wide rules protecting the authenticity of leather and ensuring a level playing field in product labeling.
