Pink Sheet is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By


CSPI's VitaminWater lawsuit continues

This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet

Executive Summary

A federal judge denies Coca-Cola's motion to dismiss the Center for Science in the Public Interest's lawsuit alleging the firm makes deceptive and unsubstantiated claims for the VitaminWater line. In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Judge John Gleeson also found the firm's use of the word "healthy" violates FDA regulations on vitamin-fortified foods. According to CSPI, the judge found the claim "May reduce the risk of age-related eye disease" for the line's "focus" flavor may not comply with FDA regulations. The consumer advocacy group, which filed suit against Coca-Cola in January 2009, says the judge rejected the Atlanta-based global food and beverage firm's argument that disclosing sugar content on Nutrition Facts labels eliminates a possibility consumers may be "misled into thinking the product has only water and vitamins, and little or no sugar" (1"The Tan Sheet" Jan. 19, 2009, In Brief)

You may also be interested in...

CSPI alleges VitaminWater claims false

One month after FDA sent a letter to Coca-Cola warning that the beverage firm misbranded its Diet Coke Plus, the Atlanta-based firm's VitaminWater is the target of a proposed class action lawsuit. This time, the Center for Science in the Public Interest files a suit in the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California alleging the company falsely advertises its VitaminWateras a healthy alternative to soda. Each bottle of VitaminWater has 33 grams of sugar and makes claims that "go far beyond even the loose, so-called 'structure/function claims' allowed by" FDA, CSPI says in a Jan. 15 release. Coca-Cola could not be reached for comment. FDA has warned that Diet Coke Plus does not contain enough nutrients for a "plus" claim (1"The Tan Sheet" Jan. 5, 2009, p. 9)

Unfairly Hit By Influencer Assassins? Now Could Be Your Chance To Mobilize The FTC

Brands unfairly maligned by powerful influencers, strictly on behalf of paying competitors, could have occasion to broach the subject with the US Federal Trade Commission, which seeks comment on its “Endorsement Guides” in an increasingly complex and competitive, digitized advertising environment.    

FTC Commissioner Proposes Making Endorsement Guides Into Rules, Seeking Stiffer Penalties

At least one FTC commissioner seems convinced that the agency’s Enforcement Guides are ripe for an update to address unscrupulous influencer marketing practices. Democrat Rohit Chopra proposes their codification into formal rules that would make violators liable for civil penalties and damages under FTC Act provisions.





Ask The Analyst

Please Note: You can also Click below Link for Ask the Analyst
Ask The Analyst

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts