"Unlimited refill" lawsuit at Universal

Okay. Just read this article:

And my initial reaction was that it seems frivolous. And while I still think that’s true, the more I thought about it, the more I have to think there isn’t a point here.

Okay. To be clear, we’ve taken advantage of the Unlimited Refills deal in the past, and we were well aware of the 10 minute time between refills. But then you have to think about the fact that they are advertising this as UNLIMITED. Which means NO LIMITS. And yet, a 10 minute delay between fills is, by definition, a limit.

Of course, other places have similar plans, but don’t always call it “unlimited” because, well, it isn’t. They might call it the “All Day” drink plan or something like that where you get free refills all day long…but there is a time delay between those free refills.

So, is Universal wrong for advertising this as their UNLIMITED drink plan? I think they are. Because it’s not unlimited, by definition.

Do I think there should be a law suit? No. But then, what motivation would any company, including Universal, have for changing their false advertising if there wasn’t.


This is copy & paste directly from the Universal website - The Terms & Conditions of the offer-

††Coca-Cola freestyle® souvenir cup is a separate purchase. Separate theme park admission ticket required. Valid Coca-Cola freestyle® Souvenir Cup required to dispense Coca-Cola freestyle®. Refills are limited to no more than one (1) pour from the Coca-Cola freestyle® machine per 10 minutes and valid day of purchase only at participating Coca-Cola freestyle locations. Sharing is not permitted. Available for purchase at any participating theme park Coca-Cola freestyle® locations or reservation carts. If you purchased and received a Coca-Cola freestyle® souvenir cup ticket exchange the ticket in-park for a Coca-Cola freestyle® souvenir cup at any participating Coca-Cola freestyle® location or reservation cart. Tickets are non-refundable. No additional discounts apply.

They can call it whatever they want. As long as they have this outlined and displayed for public viewing it doesn’t matter what someone “thinks” unlimited should mean. Our courts have far better things to be discussing. We shouldn’t have to cater to the lowest denominator of our society that refuses to educate themselves.


I agree with you to a point. But, I also have to agree it is false advertising for Unviersal to call it “Unlimited Refills” as a means of advertising it in big letters. Because it isn’t Unlimited refills. It is “Free refills, all day long!” But NOT Unlimited.

The lawsuit isn’t so much my issue…but if other amusement parks are careful about the use of language when it comes to advertising a product, I think Universal should do the same.

I even totally get why Universal limits the refills. But that’s just it. It isn’t “unlimited” then.

I don’t know. I can see both sides on this.

1 Like

Amen. I am a paralegal and have had it up to here with people and idiotic lawsuits. I haven’t read the article, but this person must have a very blessed life for this to even be a concern.


Are these truly Everlasting?? Where does it stop?



They are Unlimited refills - with a 10 minute break between. You can have as many refills as you want in a single day with a break in between each. It’s clearly defined.


Everlasting is part of the name of the product, though. It isn’t mean to be that you’re getting gobstoppers that are everlasting. But you are getting “Everlasting Gobstoppers”.

That’s different from advertising “Unlimited refills” when the product itself isn’t called “Unlimited refills”.

1 Like

That very well could be. And my initial gut reaction was, “How ridiculous.” But as I thought about it, I can’t help but think there is a point. If a company is using a phrase to advertise a product that clearly has an understood definition and then decides to change that definition into something else, it does feel wrong. And even though this INSTANCE of the situation seems trivial, you have to wonder about the greater implications of it if it is allowed here, what is to stop a company from falsely advertising something more significant.


Sooo just to clarify here: A Target gift card can’t be used to buy Target merchandise, like other gift cards, and you’re fine with that, but the buzz/marketing phrase “unlimited refills” doesn’t specify the words “amount of” and you are seeing legitimacy in a law suit?

Not sure what the Target gift card has anything to do with anything. :confused:

I see your point. I truly do. But in this instance, I’m inserting common sense and the necessity to read details. And my own biased irritation that this is even happening AND that the media is giving it attention.

1 Like

There is a certain irony in this (taken from Universal’s own website.)

Cause it’s a limit on what the gift card can do even though the understanding is “target gift cards allow you to buy anything that is sold by target.”

Oh, I totally get it. Which is why I said from the start that I don’t think there should be a lawsuit.

But I also think Universal shouldn’t make misleading statements in advertising a product.

I don’t see it the same at all. Target doesn’t ADVERTISE in their language that the usage of a gift card is unlimited in that sense. It is merely a “gift card”. There is no implied limitations nor lack thereof in that. While one might UNDERSTAND it one way, another might understand it another. It is open to interpretation.

But the very word “UNLIMITED” means without any limits. Any other interpretation is just changing the English language! :smiley:

I think for me it’s just a matter of this being the easiest way to name it. How else can say that you can get refills over and over again? Should they call it the Refill Every 10-Minute Mug? Again, I understand and agree with you to an extent, but I, personally, don’t really feel this is that misleading.

1 Like

Well, other amusement parks do call it something else. “All Day Dining”, “Free Drink Refills All Day”, etc.

Those don’t imply unlimited, just that you can get free refills all day.

1 Like

Yes. They do. And then they throw in a disclaimer saying “some restrictions apply.” And that makes it all OK, apparently.

If you don’t see it as the same or even a closely related scenario, you’re picking and choosing what you acknowledge.

The difference is clear. In the Target case, they are stating what it is. A gift card.

In the Universal case, they are making an explicit claim about their product that isn’t true. That it is unlimited refills. Which it isn’t.

1 Like

I guess, unlike this dude, I just have better things to do with my time than to nitpick this ridiculousness. I’ll tap out due to my own bias!