In part, this situation was created by a lack of parity in the way federal labeling requirements apply to the manufacturers of brand-name and generic drugs. The Food and Drug Administration enables brand-name manufacturers to unilaterally alter their products' safety warnings in light of newly acquired information. In contrast, generic manufacturers are required to maintain product labels that are, at all times, identical to their brand-name counterparts. This requirement persists even when generic manufacturers discover life-threatening side effects in their products or when brand-name manufacturers have stopped producing the branded drug. Conscious of the peril posed to consumers by the Pliva ruling, the Supreme Court in its decision encouraged Congress or the FDA to change the existing regulation to better protect consumers.