NYT story about Equal v. Splenda battle

In which I'm quoted. I like Merisant's lawyer's description of people misunderstanding Splenda as "magic sugar." That's the kind of phrase that can help win a case. Until I began reading the business reporting on this case, I wasn't aware of the Sugar Institute's separate lawsuit against Splenda. There have also been various consumer lawsuits claiming deception over the Splenda-sugar relationship, but as I understand it most have gone nowhere, which isn't surprising given the high standards applied to consumers these days -- competitors have a much better shot at winning. Which, I must say, seems odd, given that the ideology of the modern Lanham Act is that competitors are proxies for consumers harmed by false advertising.