The Red Bull lawsuit settlement was a $13 million class-action deal reached in 2014, resolving consumer claims that the company’s “Gives You Wings” marketing misled buyers about the drink’s performance benefits. Red Bull denied any wrongdoing, the case never went to trial, and the window to file a claim closed on March 2, 2015.1CBC News. Red Bull Settles False Advertising Lawsuit for $13M
What the Lawsuit Actually Alleged
Benjamin Careathers filed the class-action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in 2013. Despite the way the case gets talked about online, no one claimed to expect actual wings. The complaint targeted Red Bull’s broader marketing, which positioned the drink as scientifically superior to a plain cup of coffee or a caffeine pill, arguing that the company charged premium prices for performance and concentration benefits it couldn’t back up with evidence.1CBC News. Red Bull Settles False Advertising Lawsuit for $13M
Careathers stacked several legal theories, including California’s Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law, and Consumers Legal Remedies Act, along with the federal Lanham Act and unjust enrichment.2CCH. Careathers Red Bull Complaint The Lanham Act piece matters because it prohibits misrepresenting the “nature, characteristics, [or] qualities” of goods in commercial advertising.3Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 15 US Code 1125 – False Designations of Origin, False Descriptions, and Dilution Forbidden A slogan like “Gives You Wings” is generally protected as puffery, but claims that a product is scientifically better than ordinary caffeine are testable, and that is where the case had teeth.
How the Settlement Worked
Red Bull agreed to pay $13 million to end the case in 2014. A company spokesperson said Red Bull settled “to avoid the unpredictability and high costs of litigating in the U.S.” and maintained that its “marketing has always been witty, truthful and accurate.”1CBC News. Red Bull Settles False Advertising Lawsuit for $13M
Anyone in the United States who had bought at least one Red Bull product between January 1, 2002, and October 3, 2014, could file a claim. Claimants picked either a $10 cash payment or $15 worth of Red Bull products, with no proof of purchase required.4PR Newswire. Red Bull Class Action Settlement Notice Red Bull also agreed to cover class counsel’s fees up to $4.75 million, paid separately from the consumer fund.
Because the fund was capped, individual payouts shrank as more people filed. Over a million claims came in. Initial payments went out in early 2016, and cash claimants who received their $10 checks later got a second, smaller payment of roughly $2 as leftover funds were distributed.
Can You Still File a Claim?
No. The claim deadline was March 2, 2015, and all payouts were completed in 2016. The settlement only covered purchases made in the United States. The case still circulates on social media as though it’s active, but there is no mechanism to receive money from it now.
Did Red Bull Have to Change Its Advertising?
Red Bull still uses “Gives You Wings.” The settlement didn’t require the company to drop the slogan, and because the case settled instead of going to verdict, no court ever ruled that Red Bull’s advertising was actually false. There is no binding legal precedent from the case.
What it did show is that consumers can pull real money from a company whose performance claims outrun its evidence, even without proving deliberate fraud. The no-proof-of-purchase rule brought in more than a million claims, and defending the case to a jury would have cost Red Bull more than the $13 million it paid to end it.
Related Energy Drink Rulings
Cases against other energy drink makers produced results the Red Bull case did not. In 2016, a Washington state court found that the makers of 5-hour Energy violated the state’s Consumer Protection Act, rejecting the company’s “Ask Your Doctor” survey methodology and finding no scientific support for the claim that its “energy blend” extended alertness beyond what caffeine alone would produce.5Washington State Office of the Attorney General. Judge Rules 5-Hour ENERGY Violated Consumer Protection Act That was a judicial finding of deceptive advertising, not a settlement.
Since the Red Bull payout, energy drink companies have generally tightened their advertising language. Catchy slogans have stayed; specific scientific-sounding claims made without clinical evidence are the kind of thing that lands a company in a complaint.