There Should Be a Price to Pay for Knowingly Lying to Consumers
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
February 2017: A state court judge granted final approval of this settlement.
November 2016: A state judge preliminarily approved a settlement of a false advertising class-action lawsuit against BetterBody Food & Nutrition. The complaint alleges that BetterBody deceptively markets its Extra Virgin Coconut Oil and Naturally Refined Coconut Oil as healthy in violation of California law. According to the settlement terms, class members with proof of purchase will receive a full refund for the products they purchased. Class members without proof of purchase will receive a refund of up to $40 but will be composed of 40% cash and 60% gift cards (or 100% gift cards, if they prefer). In addition, the company agreed to remove certain statements from the labels and advertising for its Extra Virgin Coconut Oil and Naturally Refined Coconut Oil (e.g., “A Healthy Alternative to Butter & Cooking Oil” and “One of the healthiest oils in the world”). A final fairness hearing is scheduled for February 17, 2017. (Cumming et al v. BetterBody Food & Nutrition, LLC, Case No. 37-2016-00019510, San Diego Superior Court)
For more information about other class-action lawsuits regarding coconut oil and TINA.org’s coverage of the product, click here.
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
Letters alert agencies and organizations to company’s improper marketing.
TINA.org discovers some roadblocks to unlocking this purportedly free offer.
New research points to “no.”
Why disclosures are key to protecting informed consumer choice and competition.