Words can be rather costly

This week, a federal judge ruled that a lawsuit brought by consumers against Starbucks could move forward.

Its key claim? That none of the coffee chain’s Refresher fruit beverages actually contain fruit.

To which Starbucks’ replied: the product names – like Mango Dragonfruit, Pineapple Passionfruit, and Strawberry Açai Lemonade – just describe the drinks’ flavors, not their ingredients, and no reasonable consumers would be confused.

📈 Zoom out: Much like our subscriber base over the past few months, similar types of false advertising lawsuits against fast-food restaurants have been growing at a rapid pace.

According to law firm Perkins Coie, 214 class-action lawsuits were filed against the food and beverage industry in 2022, and 331 cases were brought the year before – a fairly significant increase from the 81 cases filed in 2014.

Some past examples of lawsuit claims:

• Burger King's Whoppers are smaller than they appear.
• Barilla pasta isn't made in Italy.
• The "boneless wings" served at Buffalo Wild Wings aren't actually chicken wings.
• Subway's "100% tuna" sandwiches either partially or completely lack tuna.
• Taco Bell skimps on the fillings in its Mexican Pizza, Crunchwrap Supreme, and more.

Some of these lawsuits get tossed out in court, others have resulted in big payouts. A&W agreed to pay up to $15 million to settle claims that its root beer and cream soda weren't "made with aged vanilla" as the labels suggested. And in 2014, Red Bull announced it would pay more than $13 million to settle a lawsuit brought by buyers who said the energy drink didn't "give them wings" like the company’s marketing promised.