image

Coca‑Cola sued for allegedly ignoring cookie‑opt‑out preferences on its websites

CaliforniaIP & Technology
Coca‑Cola sued for allegedly ignoring cookie‑opt‑out preferences on its websites

Two California residents have filed a proposed class action in federal court accusing Coca‑Cola and several of its beverage brands of continuing to share website visitors’ data with third‑party advertisers after users opted out of tracking cookies.

The lawsuit, filed Friday in Northern California federal court, says the company’s cookie‑consent banners let users toggle off advertising, analytics and personalization cookies. Despite the opt‑out, the sites allegedly kept sending tracking information to companies such as Meta, Google, TikTok, Microsoft, Snapchat, Pinterest and X.

How the alleged tracking worked

According to the complaint, the websites for Coca‑Cola, Sprite, Fanta, Diet Coke, Powerade, Vitaminwater, Fairlife, Smartwater and BODYARMOR displayed banners that promised users control over their data. Plaintiffs claim that after they turned off the optional cookies, network‑traffic analysis by their attorney’s software still showed third‑party cookies being set and data being transmitted.

The data reportedly included browsing history, site interactions, shopping behavior, device details, location information and data entered into site forms.

Claims and relief sought

The plaintiffs allege invasion of privacy, intrusion upon seclusion, unlawful wiretapping, fraud and unjust enrichment. They are seeking damages, restitution, attorneys’ fees and an injunction that would force Coca‑Cola to honor consumers’ cookie preferences.

What this means for everyday internet users

If the lawsuit proceeds, any user who visits Coca‑Cola’s web properties and disables cookies could be part of the proposed class. Affected individuals may want to keep records of their cookie settings and any evidence of continued tracking. While the complaint does not name a filing deadline for claims, class‑action participants typically must opt‑in or otherwise respond to court notices if the case moves forward.

Consumers should also review privacy settings on other sites and consider using browser extensions that block trackers, especially when a site’s own consent tools appear ineffective.

When to consider legal help

Anyone who believes their personal data was shared despite opting out may benefit from consulting a privacy‑focused attorney to assess potential claims and to stay informed about class‑action developments.

What this means: our conclusions

1 Good news1 Risk1 What to watch2 What to do
  1. Good newsPotential shift in how companies honor cookie choices

    If the court requires Coca‑Cola to stop tracking after opt‑outs, other firms may need to redesign consent mechanisms, improving consumer control.

  2. RiskRisk of broader privacy exposure

    The case highlights that opting out may not stop data collection, leaving users vulnerable to profiling and targeted ads.

  3. What to watchWatch for class‑action certification

    The next key step is whether the court will certify the proposed class, which will determine who can participate.

  4. What to doCompanies may tighten consent banners

    To avoid similar lawsuits, businesses could make consent banners clearer and ensure technical compliance with user choices.

  5. What to doConsumers should document opt‑out attempts

    Keeping screenshots of cookie settings can help prove that a user tried to block tracking, useful if a claim proceeds.

This article is general information based on Courthouse News Service and court or agency records available at publication time. It is not legal advice; laws and deadlines differ by state and by case. Published November 9, 2026.

Source: Courthouse News Service

More from California

Find a lawyer in California

Reading about the law is one thing, applying it to your own case is another. Browse verified attorneys in California by practice area.