In spite of a judicial ruling calling for the prohibition of cigarettes labeled "light" or "low-tar," local retailers expect tobacco sales to remain steady.

"It's an addictive drug," Robert Huff, owner of Boots Dairyette, 401 W. Beaver Ave., said. He said he estimates "light" brands to be 60 percent of his current cigarette sales, but that the change won't affect his overall sales.

"People aren't going to just stop smoking because the name's changed," he said.

On Aug. 17, Federal District Court Judge Gladys Kessler ruled in a long-standing suit that numerous tobacco companies, including Philip Morris USA, RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company, and British American Tobacco, were guilty under federal racketeering laws of purposefully deceiving the public on the adverse effects of tobacco, according to court documents.

In particular, she attacked the marketing of "healthier" cigarettes, citing evidence that such cigarettes were designed to fool Federal Trade Commission testing machines and were marketed to smokers as a healthy alternative to quitting, according to the documents.

Kessler declined to comment on the ruling outside of documented statements.

"Defendants have marketed and sold their lethal product with zeal, with deception, with the single-minded focus on their financial success and without regard for their human tragedy or social costs that their success exacted," Kessler said in court documents.

According to the judge's order, indicted tobacco companies are "prohibited from using any descriptors indicating lower tar delivery -- including, but not limited to, 'low-tar,' 'light,' 'mild,' 'medium,' and 'ultra light'," effective Jan. 1, 2007. The order would affect such brand names as Marlbolo Light, Kool Mild and Pall Mall Ultra Light.

Despite the fact that "light" cigarettes are estimated to account for half of all cigarette sales in the country, Grace Mehalick, general manager of McLanahan's Student Store, 414 E. College Ave., isn't expecting the federal ruling to adversely affect sales.

"Customers will still buy old brands," she said. "The tobacco cigarette companies will supply us the ads to notify them of the name change."

Some believe that a name change might not even occur, as tobacco litigants are currently appealing the judge's decision.

In late September, Kessler denied a request from defending corporations for a stay, or a stop in the judicial proceeding, on her order while their appeal is processed, holding them to the January 2007 compliance deadline.

RJ Reynolds spokesperson David Howard said Kessler's decision will cause "irreparable harm."

"It's a textbook case of when a stay should be granted," he said. "We're confident in our defense team and expect our legal case to succeed."

Howard declined to speculate on how RJ Reynolds would react should its appeal fail.

Kessler responded to such concerns, saying the "loss of market share, if it results from imposing an appropriate remedy to prevent and restrain past violations of the law, may well be the price defendants have to pay," according to court documents.

Student smokers at Penn State said they are not concerned by the "low-tar" controversy.

"I don't really feel like I'm affected by cigarette advertising," said Sarah Swaintek (junior-nutrition), who says she'll still buy Parliament Lights if their name is changed. "I smoke what I smoke for the taste and the filter design."

Chris Beegle (senior-physics), who also smokes Parliament Lights, agreed.

"I don't feel misled," he said. "I knew what I was getting into."

And as for his buying habits, he said they won't change "one bit."

"I always buy what's on sale anyways," he said.