Vitaminwater VS Naked Juice
Verdict DROP IT DROP IT
The Reality When consumers sued Coca-Cola in 2009 over these claims, the company's own legal defense -- raised in its motion to dismiss -- was that 'no consumer could reasonably be misled into thinking Vitaminwater was a healthy beverage.' US District Court Judge John Gleeson rejected that defense in July 2010, ruling that naming the product 'vitaminwater' and its flavors 'energy,' 'revive,' and 'defense' has 'the potential to reinforce a consumer's mistaken belief that the product is composed of only vitamins and water,' and largely denied Coca-Cola's motion to dismiss the case. A consolidated class-action lawsuit in California alleged the products contained added synthetic vitamins and other ingredients inconsistent with the 'all natural' and 'non-GMO' labeling, including genetically altered soy in some varieties. PepsiCo settled in 2013 for $9 million while continuing to deny the labels were misleading or false, agreeing to redesign labels to eliminate or modify the specific claims at issue and to stop describing the juices as 'all natural' going forward. Consumers who purchased the products between September 27, 2007, and August 19, 2013, could claim up to $75 with proof of purchase or $45 without.
SHORT ANSWER
Vitaminwater: Coca-Cola's own legal defense against a 2009 lawsuit over vitaminwater's health claims argued that no reasonable consumer should have believed the product was healthy in the first place -- and a federal judge ruled the product's own naming and flavor names could still mislead people into thinking it was.
Naked Juice: PepsiCo paid $9 million in 2013 to settle a class-action lawsuit alleging Naked Juice products labeled 'all natural' and 'non-GMO' actually contained genetically altered soy and added synthetic ingredients, and agreed to stop using the 'all natural' claim.