Why don&#39;t alcoholic beverages have the ingredients list? Most alcoholic beverages (such as beers and wines) don't list the ingredients or nutritional information. Why is this? Is there a special exception for alcoholic beverages?
Is there a special exception for alcoholic beverages? Yes Standardized alcoholic beverages (those with compositional standards in Division 2 of the FDR such as beer, wine, rum and bourbon whiskey) are exempt from the requirement to show a list of ingredients on the label [B.01.008(2)(f), FDR]. This also applies to icewine which, in addition to meeting the prescribed standard in Volume 8 of the Canadian Standards of Identity document, also needs to meet the wine standard in Division 2 of the FDR. But this only applies to standardized alcohol (as laid out in B.02 of the Food and Drugs Regulations) They are also exempt from the nutrition facts if they have an alcohol content of more than 0.5% : Beverages with an alcohol content of more than 0.5% are usually exempt from carrying a Nutrition Facts table [B.01.401(2)(b)(i), FDR]. Except in the cases where this doesn't apply (Reasons for losing the exemption)
No However, there are laws against misrepresentation. If you use the expression ‘Houston Bar’ for something not made or associated with Houston you may be violating these. In addition, the World International Property Organisation recognises geographic identifications which have the effect of law in many jurisdictions. These are a subset of US trademark law.
There are a couple of indications that a bouncer may not confiscate an ID. This policy document adopting licensing policies to Require licensees with fake ID violations to temporarily or permanently hire on-site law enforcement or certified security guards who are properly trained to check IDs during regular or peak hours to deter the use of fake IDs and give gatekeepers the opportunity to pass suspected fakes to an officer or guard for a second opinion and potential confiscation. Where appropriate, jurisdictions could empower the gatekeeper to confiscate fake IDs so they are not returned to the underage drinker and sent back into circulation. To ensure compliance with legal issues (e.g., property rights, bailment issues), arrange for the on-call or on-site presence of local law enforcement. Local bar and restaurant associations, especially those in concentrated entertainment zones, can join together to share the expense of law enforcement resources. That implies that the bouncer does not already have that authority, and also indicates that the confiscation should be performed by the police. This bouncer training manual says that Even though you may consider the ID to be fake, it is not considered the server's property. Therefore servers and sellers should not confiscate IDs they suspect to be fake. Rather... follow up with a call to the police to verify suspected false IDs. However, a jurisdiction may grant servers that power, as in the case of Colorado. Washington doesn't do that, so bouncers would need to call the police (not that they always do, since passing a fake ID is somewhere between a misdemeanor and a felony). The general principle is that you may not confiscate another person's property, but the police can seize property if it is reasonable to do so. A state may pass a law authorizing a licensee to do likewise (though it does raise questions about the bouncer's understanding of "reasonable cause to believe"). The Colorado statute is restricted to licensee and their employees, and does not apply to "anyone who suspects an ID", nor does it allow civilian confiscation of other property such as an automobile that is suspected of being stolen.
united-states You are protected by copyright as a matter of law, even if you don't post a copyright notice, although you have slightly more procedural rights if you do post a copyright notice and there would need to be a filing with the copyright registrar (a division of the Library of Congress) before you brought suit. You can't really get any other intellectual property protections for it except possibly a trademark if you have a distinctive mark or name or logo for the app.
Custom is more important than the law AFAIK there is no legal requirement to provide concessional pricing for any goods or services. Custom dictates that this is more common for services than for goods but, for example, cinema’s often don’t provide concessional pricing for blockbuster movies.
The FDA promulgates regulations regarding what "cream cheese" etc. is, in 21 CFR Part 133 which covers cheese and related products. Cream cheese is described in §133.133, and there are sections on cottage cheese, cheddar, and so on. There is no general definition of "cheese" in this part, nor in related Part 131 covering milk and cream. Although there is no regulation defining the general term "cheese", by its regulatory inclusion with cottage cheese, cheddar and myriad other standard cheeses, one can argue that cream cheese is a kind of cheese (assuming there is no state regulation or contractual term that pins down what counts as "cheese"). By way of contrast, labne, often co-labeled "kefir cheese" (sometimes equated with "Greek yogurt"), is not included in any federal regulation, and at least one brand does not identify itself as a "type of yogurt", leaving the monolingual consumer with only "kefir cheese" to tell you what it is. Supplying labne as an instance of cheese would be in shaky legal ground, not so with cottage and cream cheese. If a person is contracted to supply "cheese" with no further specification, they can rely on ordinary usage of the term, and the evidence of ordinary usage would include cream cheese as a kind of cheese. If someone were to supply labne as an instance of cheese, that would be more problematic.
What’s the problem? Most likely the situation is 100% sure that he or she wouldn’t have performed the operation without anaesthesia. Therefore anaesthesia was not something his brain needed to remember, therefore it didn’t. He gave a truthful answer. He has no memory of it. He doesn’t need a memory of it, he just needed to make sure it’s done. Do you have any reason to believe it was not done? Operating without anaesthesia would be negligent. Not remembering it is done is not. On the other hand, he would have remembered the patient screaming if he started cutting without anaesthesia.
The government guidelines on naming food products states that if an ingredient is different to what consumers expect, it must be made clear by either: including the ingredient as part of the product’s name stating the ingredient close to the product’s name on the label For example, if a pesto sauce has been made with parsley instead of the traditional basil, the product must either be: called ‘parsley pesto sauce’ have the ingredient ‘parsley’ stated next to or directly under the product name So, it seems that the phrases like &quot;our cheese is made of 100% plant ingredients&quot; or &quot;plant based cheese&quot; (without quotation marks or asterisks) are compliant with these conditions. As an aside, the names of 15 cheeses are legally protected, but this relates to their geographical origins - not the product’s actual ingredients.