Can I buy cheap perfume and resell for a novelty product?

Factual Questions
1

OK, I have an idea for a novelty product, a parody perfume in fact, which I want to sell to the small, OK, extremely small, coterie of depraved humorphiles who like my stuff. The main thing will be the labels I’ll create. I want to buy huge bottles of cheap perfume, water it down, repackage it in smaller bottles, and sell it as a brand of watered-down cheap perfume. And if you think that’s not funny, remember there are millions of people who watch network TV and laugh at jokes they’ve her a thousand times that never made you even smile.

Anyway, any problems with such a plan? If I have to go through half a dozen boards, bureaus, licensers and whatnot, I’m not gonna bother – it’s just a novelty product for a limited audience of degenerate laughter lovers, for God’s sake.

I’m also thinking of doing something along the same lines with edible panties and some processed foods. I’ll buy existing products and repackage them as a novelty product. Since this could conceivably be eaten, would it be different?

2

Caveats: IANAL, and I’m based in the UK where the laws may be different, but I don’t think so.

Basic answer: viz. the perfume, yes, you can do this, but you must be careful about a few things.

First of all, you must not harm the name or reputation of whichever brand you are in fact recycling. It’s best if there is no way for anyone to know or deduce which perfume(s) you are using as your source material, and definitely make sure that the naming, packaging and labelling of your item contains no clues as to the original.

Second of all, you must make it reasonably obvious that your intentions are humorous and jokey, and you do not offer the product for actual use as a perfume nor do you seriously expect it to be considered for use in this way (try to think what a jury would decide if this point ever came to trial). This is to avoid charges of misrepresentation. If people buy your ‘cheap perfume’ because they think it’s a bargain, and entirely miss the ‘jokey’ element, then you could be considered guilty of misrepresentation.

Third of all, you must take care not to be guilty of ‘passing off’, i.e. attempting to benefit IN ANY WAY from the promotion and branding of the perfume which you are re-packaging, or suggesting that your product is worth buying because it is similar to another which already has a good reputation. The law is very clear on this. Companies spend a lot of serious bucks promoting consumer trust in, and loyalty to, a particular brand. Only the company itself is allowed to benefit from that effort and expediture. If you try to benefit from it, in any way, you are guilty of ‘passing off’. First you’ll just get nasty letters from the company which believes its rights have been violated, and after that it gets legally nasty and expensive.

Good luck, have fun.

As regards stuff you can eat: forget it. You have to jump through lots and lots of legal hoops before you can sell consumable stuff, starting with formal investigations of the premises where the products are manufactured before you will be granted a licence. The Health & Safety people will be crawling over you constantly, and if anyone ever falls ill and believes it was because of eating something you sold, I just hope you are very, very wealthy. Don’t go there. not even for fun.

3

Not a problem, in fact, I was thinking of buying several different brands of cheap perfume and mixing them together so there’s no distinctive odor. But since I don’t really know what each perfume contains, mixing them together might not be a good idea. In any event, rebottling should do it.

This I don’t get. If the original product was sold as a perfume, why shouldn’t people be able to use my product as a perfume? I’d be very surprised if this sort of “re-branding” doesn’t occur already.

I’m not parodying a particular perfume, it’s more of a lifestyle parody. The jokey elements will be hard to miss.

This is absolutely not a problem.

Thank you, I plan to. Bringing more fun into the world is an inherently good thing. As for the stuff people can eat – yeah, you’re probably right about that. But once again, I wouldn’t be making any new foodstuffs, just repackaging two existing ones.

Thanks for your thoughts.

4

I’m not sure what, exactly, you have in mind, but maybe this would be worth considering…
If I wanted to market a line of perfumes/fragrances, I’d go to a fragrance supply website and order some body-safe fragrances, such as those used in soap and other body products. Then, if you want to cut it, just mix it with almond oil or follow any of the numerous recipes you can find online (you can also mix fragrance oils with…I think witch hazel? Not sure, but you could find it easily enough with a google search.)
That way, you’ve got your own fragrances, you can name them what you want, and you don’t have to worry that the makers of [Big Name Products] are going to come after you.
Not to mention the fact that you can get a pound of fragrance oil a LOT cheaper than you can get a pound of perfume.

If it helps, these are extremely reputable and up-front websites. Just make sure that they specify “safe for lotions” or other body products.
www.sweetcakes.com (All their stuff is skin-safe.)
www.brambleberry.com (Ditto.)
www.bittercreek.com (Not all, just check.)

Does that help?

There are also fairly explicit labeling laws regarding ingredients and amounts. Offhand, I don’t have the website, but you have to define every ingredient (except fragrance oil can be called “fragrance oil” rather than breaking it down into each component), complete contact info has to be present, and you have to be VERY accurate when you weigh or measure your product. Also, you need an instructional section that explains how to use your product, and the standard “Do not use internally” CYA stuff.

Good luck. Sounds fun!

Best,
karol

5

If you want to manufacture and sell an actual perfume, to be used as such, then you are selling something you expect people to apply to their skin. This means the onus is on you to make sure that your products is safe to use in this way, and will not cause any bad or allergic reaction or any other kind of harm. You not only need to satisfy yourself about this, you have to satisfy the legal authorities. You begin to see the problem? This is why we get all the debates about testing cosmetics, and specifically testing them on animals.

If someone manages to come to some harm, because they claim your perfume brought their skin out in a rash or it got into their eyes or their 5 yr. old child swallowed some… well, that might mean a lawsuit. Best of luck.

If you are just selling a bottle of perfume that is a joke or novelty product and is not actually meant to be used as perfume, and so long as any jury in the land is going to vote that this was clear to the end user, then it could be said you don’t have to jump through the same legal hoops to be able to sell and distribute this product, because it’s just liquid in a bottle. Just bear in mind that juries are notoriously capable of voting the ‘wrong’ way, and that no attempt to make an ‘idiot-proof’ product has ever succeeded. There is always someone more idiotic than you ever planned for.

Finally, if you take product A which has already been through all the legal testing hassle, and product B likewise, and just blend them together, then you are technically involved in a new manufacturing process and the onus is still on you to make sure the resulting mix is safe. There are LOTS of manufacturing processes that are just about putting A and B together and selling the combination. It doesn’t make it any less of a ‘manufacturing process’ in law and it doesn’t get around your responsibility to make sure that what you are offering is safe.

It’s always helpful to run little mind experiments from the other point of view. Suppose you saw a ‘novelty’ perfume for sale. Its labelling and packaging made it obvious that it was intended to parody a particular lifestyle, and there was a big disclaimer on it saying ‘Novelty product. Not for actual use as a perfume. Do not apply to skin’. You buy it and take it home. Your own child or a nephew or some small person gets hold of the bottle, breaks it. Gets the ‘perfume’ in his eyes, it causes a bad reaction, and he needs some professional ophthalmic care which costs you big bucks. You might well feel like taking the manufacturer to court to make them pay, right? And how hard would it be to find a lawyer who felt you had a strong case?

Your job is to make sure you are never on the receiving end of a letter from that kind of lawyer. I hope this makes things a little clearer.

6

OK, this is the part I’m not getting. Let’s say that Sweet Smells makes fragrance oils that are to be used in perfume. They’ve done all the testing and such and their product is certified as safe for use on human skin so long as it’s diluted to 1/500 parts with water or whatever. So I come along and buy the fragrance oils, dilute them as required and sell them as required. I make sure I’m buying from someone who has had their product certified as safe. I maybe pay a premium for their product for that reason, as opposed from buying really cheap from Joe Blow down the street who cooks up fragrance oils of unknown origin and crystal meth in his kitchens.

Aren’t I exempt from liability if I buy a certified product? Aren’t I covered by the testing done by the fragrance oil manufacturer?

7

IANAL but my guess is no. Testing has been done proving that each seperate oil is safe. If you combine them, you must perform tests proving that they are safe in combination. You must also prove that they are not contamined by anything else during the mixing process.

Re Rebranding
I doubt, in the extreme that this happens. Perfume companies have legal protections on their formulas. Any one selling that product is making unauthorized use of their exclusive property. As soon as they were discovered, they would be slapped with a cease and desist order and a lawsuit.

Re Food
The same laws apply to repackaging a food product. As others have already said, any manufacture of food products requires health inspections, additional labelling may be legally required etc.

My Suggestion

If the product is intended as a humorous novelty, simply sell empty bottles. The amount of time, money, and effort to make the product will be reduced. You won’t have to test your product for anything other than the ability to safely hold perfumes. If the buyer desires to fill the bottle with a watered down perfume of their own making, they can. But you would not be responsible for testing a consumer-made scent or liable for damages not brought about by bottle failure.

Years ago, after the film Revenge Of The Nerds was released a company sold cans of nerd repellent. The cans had humorous labels and instructions. The contents were water and propellant.

8

Empty bottles wouldn’t be any fun. It should look like there’s an actual product in there.

My suggestion… water, and food coloring if you want colors.

9

If you allow any opportunity for the product to be contaminated, no matter how minute, you must prove that your end result is safe.

10

When I was a teenager, my sister received a 16th birthday present, from one of her friends, that consisted of a can of compressed air that had been relabeled as “Airhead Refill”. It was pretty funny :wink:

11

We’re still not communicating.

I’m not going to mix any perfumes together. Let me see if I can clarify.

I know that in the case of high-end perfumes, they spend a lot of money developing and testing their stuff. But in the case of the stuff they sell at K-mart or Target (evne the stuff for kids) they probably have some distributor that sells the stuff by the 50-gallon drum to various outfits who do pretty much what I’m planning on doing – re-brand it as their own. I’m sure the people who make the stuff wholesale test it, etc., buy why would the retailer do so? They’re just putting the stuff in new packages and slapping their own label on. Pretty much what I plan to do.

Sounds like I have some research to do.

12

I doubt this the procedure. If Target received a drum, they would have to fill bottles in an area that could be proven free of contaminants and would come under certain OSHA standards for dealing with 50 gallon drums of poisonous chemicals.

My WAG is that Target, K Mart, and whoever else is relabeling ths stuff have their bottles and/or labels made by a third company and shipped to the perfume factory. That way, they don’t have do any additional testing, maintain their own bottling facility, etc. The generic perfume arrives at Target in the proper bottle and bearing the proper label and merely needs to be unpacked and put on shelves.