The Sierra Mist lawsuit has become one of the most talked-about viral stories in recent years. Millions of people on TikTok, YouTube, and Reddit have heard that PepsiCo, the multinational beverage giant, allegedly lost the rights to its lemon-lime soda Sierra Mist after a legal battle with influencer Cierra Mistt. According to this popular narrative, the influencer acquired the Sierra Mist trademark after Pepsi’s trademark supposedly expired, sued Pepsi, won millions of dollars in settlement, and ultimately forced the company to rebrand Sierra Mist into its new drink, Starry.

It’s a dramatic story—a small influencer defeating a global corporation. But is it true? This article takes a deep dive into the Sierra Mist lawsuit rumor, analyzing trademark law, expert opinions, and PepsiCo’s own history to uncover the facts.

The Background: History of Sierra Mist

PepsiCo introduced Sierra Mist in 1999 as its answer to Coca-Cola’s Sprite and Dr Pepper’s 7Up. Initially, the drink gained some traction as a refreshing lemon-lime soda with a cleaner taste profile. Pepsi positioned Sierra Mist as a healthier, crisp alternative to Sprite, and for a while, it seemed like a promising competitor.

However, over the next two decades, Sierra Mist struggled to maintain strong market performance. PepsiCo made several attempts to revive the brand:

• In 2010, it reformulated the drink as “Sierra Mist Natural”, removing artificial sweeteners and preservatives.

• In 2013, it briefly rebranded as “Mist Twst”, aiming for a modern image.

• By 2016, PepsiCo reverted to the original Sierra Mist name, acknowledging that Mist Twst had failed to connect with consumers.

Despite these changes, Sierra Mist lagged far behind Sprite in market share. According to industry reports, Sprite held a commanding lead with more than 70% of the lemon-lime soda category, leaving Sierra Mist with a single-digit percentage.

Discontinuation and Introduction of Starry

In January 2023, PepsiCo officially announced that it was discontinuing Sierra Mist and replacing it with a new product called Starry. The company described Starry as a bolder, crisper lemon-lime soda designed to appeal to younger, Gen Z consumers.

PepsiCo’s statement made no mention of lawsuits or trademark disputes. Instead, it framed the decision as a strategic marketing move, part of a broader plan to modernize its beverage lineup and gain ground against Sprite.

This transition set the stage for online speculation. Fans who were attached to Sierra Mist wanted answers, and when Cierra Mistt shared her story about a lawsuit, it seemed to fit the timeline perfectly.

The Viral Lawsuit Claim

Cierra Mistt, a popular social media influencer, claimed that PepsiCo accused her of trademark infringement because her name was similar to Sierra Mist. According to her viral videos:

• PepsiCo’s trademark for Sierra Mist had expired.

• She was able to register the Sierra Mist name herself.

• A legal battle ensued where PepsiCo tried to reclaim the trademark.

• The case ended with her winning millions of dollars in settlement.

• Pepsi allegedly had no choice but to discontinue Sierra Mist and launch Starry instead.

The story went viral quickly, garnering millions of views. Many viewers found it believable because it lined up with the discontinuation announcement and carried a classic David vs. Goliath theme.

Understanding Trademark Law

To understand whether this claim could be true, we need to look at how trademark law works.

A trademark is a type of intellectual property that legally protects brand names, logos, and slogans. Trademarks must be actively used and periodically renewed, but they don’t simply “expire” in a way that lets anyone immediately claim them. For a trademark to truly lapse, the owner must:

• Stop using it commercially for an extended period.

• Fail to renew registration after multiple notices.

• Formally abandon it.

Even when a product is discontinued, companies often keep trademarks active for years to maintain control and prevent others from profiting from their brand.

By contrast, a copyright protects creative works like music or books—it does not apply to product names like Sierra Mist. Many online discussions mixed up copyright and trademark law, leading to widespread misunderstanding.

Expert Analysis and Fact-Checking

Multiple legal experts and branding agencies have investigated the Sierra Mist lawsuit rumor and reached the same conclusion: it’s not true.

NameStormers, a professional naming consultancy, stated that PepsiCo’s trademark for Sierra Mist is still active and owned by the company. The idea that Pepsi accidentally lost it to an influencer was described as legally implausible.

Stemer Law, an intellectual property law firm, reviewed public court filings and confirmed that there is no record of a lawsuit or settlement involving PepsiCo and Cierra Mistt over the Sierra Mist name.

Reddit communities discussing the claim echoed similar doubts. Users pointed out that if such a major legal victory occurred, it would be widely reported by major news outlets and listed in public databases—yet no such evidence exists.

Evidence Comparison: Claim vs. Reality

Why PepsiCo Really Retired Sierra Mist

The decision to discontinue Sierra Mist was driven entirely by business and marketing factors. PepsiCo saw declining sales and recognized that Sierra Mist lacked strong brand identity.

Starry was launched with:

• A new formula aimed at delivering a stronger citrus flavor.

• Vibrant packaging designed to appeal to younger customers.

• Targeted advertising focusing on digital and social media channels.

Industry analysts say Pepsi had been working on this rebrand for years, long before any influencer’s lawsuit claims emerged online. The goal was to refresh the brand, not to respond to a legal defeat.

Why the Lawsuit Story Spread ?

The Sierra Mist lawsuit story became viral because it was exciting, simple, and emotionally appealing. People love underdog stories where ordinary individuals take down corporate giants.

Social media platforms amplified the claim, with algorithms pushing the content to millions of users. Because PepsiCo stayed silent on the rumor, it spread unchecked, and many assumed silence meant truth.

This is a classic case of digital misinformation, where an engaging narrative overshadows fact-checking and evidence.

Real Examples of Trademark Lawsuits

While the Sierra Mist lawsuit is fictional, there are real cases where companies have faced legal battles over trademarks:

• Apple vs. Samsung: Multiple lawsuits over smartphone designs and technology patents.

• Monster Energy vs. small businesses: The beverage company has sued several small brands for using “Monster” in their names.

• McDonald’s vs. Supermac’s: A trademark dispute over the “Big Mac” name in Europe.

These cases were all heavily documented in courts and covered by global media. Unlike the Sierra Mist rumor, real lawsuits leave paper trails and official records.

Lessons Learned from the Sierra Mist Lawsuit Myth

The viral rumor provides important lessons for influencers, businesses, and consumers:

For Influencers

• Always research trademarks before adopting a brand or stage name.

• Consider registering your own trademark to protect your identity.

For Businesses

• Communicate product changes clearly to avoid rumors and speculation.

• Monitor viral stories and address misinformation quickly to protect brand reputation.

For Consumers

• Fact-check before sharing dramatic claims online.

• Understand the difference between trademarks and copyrights to avoid confusion.

Final Thoughts: Debunking the Sierra Mist Lawsuit

After a thorough investigation, it’s clear that the Sierra Mist lawsuit never happened. PepsiCo still owns the Sierra Mist trademark, and the rebrand to Starry was a calculated marketing decision aimed at revitalizing its lemon-lime soda presence.

This story serves as a reminder of how quickly misinformation can spread in the digital age. A single influencer’s claim, combined with coincidental timing, shaped public perception without any factual basis.

For anyone interested in branding, marketing, or legal issues, the Sierra Mist lawsuit myth is a case study in viral storytelling, corporate strategy, and the importance of verifying information before believing or sharing it.