Red Bull does not, we repeat, does NOT, give you wings. #tbt

by eugenestrupinsky • March 11, 2021

Red Bull does not, we repeat, does NOT, give you wings. #tbt


On Behalf of  | Mar 11, 2021 | Firm News |



Red Bull Doesn’t Actually Give You Wings. Oh, Canada!


For over 20 years, the popular energy drink used “Red Bull gives you wings” as its catchy slogan, but in 2014, Red Bull agreed to pay out more than thirteen million dollars after settling a U.S. class action lawsuit that accused the company of false advertising. Consumers believed (claimed) that the popular energy drink would actually give them wings, as advertised.


One energy drink consumer argued that after ten years of drinking Red Bull, he neither had wings nor any enhanced athletic or intellectual performance.


According to the suit, “Even though there is a lack of genuine scientific support for a claim that Red Bull branded energy drinks provide any more benefit to a consumer than a cup of coffee, the Red Bull defendants persistently and pervasively market their product as a superior source of ‘energy’ worthy of a premium price over a cup of coffee or other sources of caffeine.”


Shortly thereafter, Canadian consumers followed suit. Plaintiff Michael Atter claimed that Red Bull made false declarations regarding the product’s usefulness. Attar argued that the beverage company violated the Quebec Consumer Protection Act by claiming that Red Bull was more effective than a lower-priced offering, like a cup of coffee.


Red Bull again paid out a large settlement to unhappy Canadian consumers. According to Dished Vancouver, Red Bull GmbH paid around $640,000 in a class action settlement. Canadian consumers who bought Red Bull in the last twelve years may receive ten dollars from the settlement.


There is, of course, important law behind this, protecting consumers from false advertising. Unfortunately, silly cases like this can clog up the court system, and make light of the need to police against unlawful business practices.

By Khalifeh & Strupinsky, P.C. March 27, 2026
Learn how to begin filing for bankruptcy with Khalifeh & Strupinsky, P.C. in Brooklyn and New York, NY. Get professional legal guidance for your financial future.
By Eugene Strupinsky March 19, 2026
Explore when businesses in Brooklyn and New York, NY should choose mediation or litigation with guidance from Khalifeh & Strupinsky, P.C., experienced in dispute resolution.
By Eugene Strupinsky March 16, 2026
Discover what bankruptcy can and cannot do for your finances. Khalifeh & Strupinsky, P.C. in Brooklyn and New York, NY provides tailored legal guidance for your situation.
By Eugene Strupinsky March 12, 2026
Learn about the legal complexities of co-op and condo transfers in NYC with Khalifeh & Strupinsky, P.C., serving Brooklyn and New York, NY. Contact us for legal advice.
By Kayla Gaisi March 10, 2026
As generative AI becomes increasingly integrated into our daily lives, it continues to raise legal questions that courts can no longer ignore. This month, the question of whether communications between criminal defendants and public AI are protected from government inspection was answered by Judge Jed Rakoff. That answer was an unequivocal 'no.' In the case at hand, defendant Bradely Heppner was charged with fraud and arrested a month later, in November 2025. When the FBI executed a search warrant at his home, they seized documents containing communications between him and the public AI platform Claude AI. According to Heppner's counsel, these communications reflected a defense strategy Heppner had generated in anticipation of potential indictment. Heppner asserted that these documents were either protected under attorney-client privilege or by the work product doctrine, arguing that he had used Claude for the purpose of obtaining legal advice and had shared these outputs with his attorneys. However, Judge Rakoff rejected both arguments. Attorney-client privilege applies only to communications between a client and a professional who owes them fiduciary duties and is subject to discipline. It is a socially valuable human relationship. Regardless of how advanced an AI systems is, it cannot meet this definition. Claude is not a human attorney and does not have an attorney-client relationship with its users, so communications with it cannot qualify for attorney-client privilege. Aside from this, Rakoff listed other reasons why Heppner's communications with Claude are not considered confidential. Firstly, Claude is a public AI system whose privacy policy discloses that communications can be shared with third parties including "governmental regulatory authorities." Secondly, as his counsel admitted, Heppner sought legal advice from Claude on his own volition, not at their direction. Even if Heppner received legal advice and later shared that with his counsel, that does not render the initially unprivileged communication privileged. The related work product doctrine fared no better for Heppner. This doctrine protects materials prepared by attorneys in anticipation of litigation from discovery by opposing parties. Here, the AI-generated documents were not prepared by or at the behest of counsel and did not reflect counsel's strategy. Thus, they fell outside the scope of the doctrine. Judge Rakoff's ruling matters because it maintains the narrowness of evidentiary privileges that is necessary for protecting the judicial system's truth-seeking function. Extending privilege to communications with public AI systems could create a dangerous loophoole, one where parties could shield discoverable information by filtering it through a chatbot. But given Rakoff's ruling, the main takeaway here is that attorneys should explicitly advise their clients not to share personal or legal information with public AI systems. Despite how routine it has now become for many to ask public AI personal questions, these communications are not confidential, and may ultimately be used as evidence in court. 
By Eugene Strupinsky February 27, 2026
Learn about costly business contract clauses and how Khalifeh & Strupinsky, P.C. in Brooklyn, New York, ensures your agreements protect your interests.
By Eugene Strupinsky February 25, 2026
Navigate blended family estate planning with Khalifeh & Strupinsky, P.C. in Brooklyn and New York, NY. Learn key strategies tailored to your family’s needs.
By Eugene Strupinsky February 20, 2026
Learn about employee rights and workplace retaliation in New York from Khalifeh & Strupinsky, P.C., Brooklyn and New York, NY. Legal guidance you can rely on.
By Eugene Strupinsky February 11, 2026
Discover what to do if you have power of attorney over a loved one with legal insights from Khalifeh & Strupinsky, P.C. in Brooklyn and New York, NY.
By Eugene Strupinsky January 29, 2026
Discover which 5 estate planning documents you should update after major life changes. Khalifeh & Strupinsky, P.C.