Are drinking straws and energy drinks similar enough to cause customer confusion if they share a brand name?

A recent court decision ruled in favor of Monster Energy’s opposition to the registration of a trademark for “Monster Straw,” citing a likelihood of confusion due to market overlap and a shared customer base. While it is true that Monster Energy’s branding extends beyond beverages to merchandise like clothing and drinkware accessories, I believe the court’s ruling was misguided. In this article, I will explain why the two brands are sufficiently distinct and why the decision may set a troubling precedent.

---

Understanding the Court’s Argument

The primary principle behind the ruling was simple:
Because Monster Energy is associated with beverages, anything beverage-related, like a straw, might confuse consumers.

At first glance, this may seem logical. However, the relationship between brands and products is far more nuanced than this broad assumption allows. Monster Energy has become such a ubiquitous household name that the word “Monster” itself feels nearly generic in certain contexts, relying heavily on its notoriety rather than specific literal associations.

Monster Straw, in contrast, uses the word “monster” in a more literal and playful sense, even featuring a mascot resembling a fictional creature — a stark contrast to Monster Energy’s metaphorical branding (implying that consuming the drink grants you “monster-like” qualities such as strength and endurance).

---

Key Differences in Branding

When comparing trade dress and outward brand presentation, the distinction between the two companies becomes even clearer:

• Color Schemes:
  • Monster Energy: Black and neon green
  • Monster Straw: Purple, pink, and yellow
• Target Demographics:
  • Monster Energy: Ageless, aggressive marketing aimed broadly
  • Monster Straw: Juvenile and playful branding, with bright colors and whimsical designs

Aside from sharing the word “Monster,” the two brands have almost nothing in common.

---

Examining Monster Energy’s Evidence

Monster Energy was required to submit evidence demonstrating a likelihood of confusion. However, the examples they provided don’t seem to strengthen their case:

• Slurpee Collaboration:
  Monster Energy cited a promotion where Monster-branded Slurpees were served in cups with dome lids and straws. However, this presentation is strongly associated with Slurpee’s brand, not Monster Energy itself. Moreover, Monster Energy products are typically sold in cans, not with straws.
• Use in Bars and Restaurants:
  They also argued that Monster drinks may be served in glasses with straws at bars or restaurants. But again, this presentation is tied more to dining customs than brand identity. Simply drinking from a glass with a straw doesn’t automatically link Monster Energy to straw products.

Overall, these examples feel overly broad and unconvincing, raising the question:
Is anything beverage-related now considered fair game for energy drink companies?
If so, what’s next — cups, pitchers, or koozies?

---

A Better Approach: Focus Groups Over Generalizations

Instead of relying on speculative arguments, I believe the courts should turn to actual consumer perception to determine confusion.
Focus groups and surveys could reveal whether average customers truly mistake Monster Straws for being affiliated with Monster Energy.

• If confusion exists: Fair enough — deny the trademark.
• If not: Let smaller brands thrive without fear of baseless litigation.

By allowing large corporations to dominate simply because of their fame and financial clout, we risk stifling innovation and competition in the market.

---

Lessons for Small Business Owners

An important takeaway from this case: Even well-structured, thoughtfully branded businesses may still face uphill legal battles.

While no result is guaranteed, small businesses can protect themselves by:

• Developing a strong, distinct brand identity
• Being prepared with clear arguments to defend their branding choices
• Seeking early legal guidance to anticipate potential conflicts

At Mindful Counsel, we specialize in helping you build a resilient brand.
We focus on crafting solid strategies to both protect your business and prepare for possible disputes, ensuring that your brand has the foundation it needs to stand firm.

 Guest post by Cameron Pickle, Associate Law Clerk

Have more questions? Reach out about how we can help protect your business and legacy.