## Facts

- Anheuser-Busch (AB) launched a national advertising campaign stating Bud Light has “no corn syrup” and contrasting that with Miller Lite and Coors Light being “made with,” “brewed with,” or “using” corn syrup.
- It was undisputed that Miller Lite and Coors Light use corn syrup during fermentation, and Bud Light uses rice; neither corn syrup nor rice remains in the finished beer after fermentation.
- MillerCoors claimed AB’s messaging conveyed that Miller Lite and Coors Light contain corn syrup in the final product and suggested negative health or quality implications.
- MillerCoors offered consumer survey evidence, consumer communications, and social-media reactions indicating consumers believed the beers contained corn syrup as an ingredient.
- MillerCoors sued under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act and sought a preliminary injunction to stop specific statements and depictions in the campaign.

## Issues

1. Whether AB’s statements and imagery about Miller Lite and Coors Light being “made with,” “brewed with,” or “using” corn syrup, and Bud Light having “no corn syrup,” were literally false or likely misleading under Lanham Act § 43(a).
2. Whether MillerCoors satisfied the preliminary-injunction requirements, including likely success on the merits, irreparable harm, and favorable balance of harms and public interest.

## Decision

- The court granted in part and denied in part the motion for a preliminary injunction.
- The court declined to broadly prohibit AB from stating that Miller Lite and Coors Light are “brewed with corn syrup,” because the statement was factually true as to the brewing process.
- The court enjoined particular claims, wording, and depictions that were likely to mislead consumers into believing corn syrup is an ingredient present in the finished beer or that it creates a health/quality difference based on its supposed presence in the final product.
- The court found irreparable harm sufficiently shown due to the campaign’s scale and its likely impact on reputation and goodwill, and concluded limited relief best balanced truthful comparative advertising against the risk of consumer deception.

## Legal Principles

- Lanham Act false-advertising liability may rest on statements that are literally false or literally true but misleading in overall message.
- Literally true but misleading advertising generally requires extrinsic evidence (such as consumer surveys) showing likely consumer deception.
- Comparative advertising may lawfully describe accurate process facts, but it may be enjoined when it likely implies a false message about a product’s composition or attributes.
- Preliminary injunctions should be tailored to prevent likely deception without unnecessarily restricting truthful commercial speech.

## Conclusion

The court issued a limited preliminary injunction, permitting accurate, process-based comparisons about corn syrup use in brewing while prohibiting ad elements likely to mislead consumers into thinking corn syrup remains in Miller Lite or Coors Light or implies adverse health or quality effects based on that mistaken belief.


MillerCoors, LLC v. Anheuser-Busch Cos., LLC, 385 F. Supp. 3d 730 (W.D. Wis. 2019)