Absurd But True
Vitaminwater Lawsuit: Coca-Cola's 'You Can Taste the Sugar' Defense
- Absurd But True
- 20 Oct 2026
- 0:41
- Short
Absurd But True. Narration in the video is an AI voice, and the pictures are illustrations and text cards, not photos of the product.
The short version
Shoppers sued Coca-Cola over the name Vitaminwater and one of its slogans, "vitamins + water = all you need". The case is Ackerman v. Coca-Cola Co., E.D.N.Y. No. 1:09-cv-00395, in federal court in Brooklyn.
At oral argument, the court records, Coca-Cola's lawyers suggested that no consumer could reasonably be misled into thinking Vitaminwater was a healthy beverage. Their reasoning: the sweet taste puts consumers on notice that it contains sugar.
What the court did
In a memorandum and order dated 21 July 2010 (Doc. 44), Judge John Gleeson denied most of Coca-Cola's motion to dismiss. That means most of the case went ahead. The sugar-and-taste point appears on page 33 of the order.
What this does not mean
Denying a motion to dismiss is not a finding that the labels were misleading. It only means the claims were allowed to continue. The shoppers' claims were allegations, and the court did not decide them in that order.
How it ended
A settlement that included label changes was approved by the court in April 2016. A settlement is not an admission that the labels were misleading.
Why it is in the Absurd But True file
Because a company's own lawyers, in court, leaned on the idea that a drink's sweetness is its own warning label. The joke is on the argument, not on anyone who bought a bottle.
Questions the video leaves you with
- Is a taste a fair substitute for reading an ingredients list?
- When a product's name sounds like health food, how much work should the rest of the label have to do?
Sources
- Ackerman v. Coca-Cola Co., memorandum and order of 21 July 2010 (Doc. 44), p. 33, E.D.N.Y. No. 1:09-cv-00395 on govinfo
- CSPI, April 2016, Vitaminwater settlement approved by court. CSPI was co-counsel for the plaintiffs.
- Truth in Advertising, Vitaminwater settlement summary
We have not found the final approval order on the docket itself. We will add it to this page if we can.
Transcript
Coca-Cola's own lawyers suggested nobody could reasonably think Vitaminwater was healthy. This is real. Ackerman v. Coca-Cola, federal court, Brooklyn. Shoppers sued over the name... and the slogan "vitamins + water = all you need." Coke's defense at oral argument: no consumer could reasonably be misled into thinking it was a healthy beverage... ...because the sweet taste puts consumers on notice that it contains sugar. Judge John Gleeson wasn't sold. In July 2010, he let most of the case go ahead. Coke denied the claims, but settled in 2016. And the labels had to change. Coke's defense? You can taste the sugar. Absurd. But true.
This video is made with AI tools and reviewed by people before release. See how we make our videos.
