Remove 2004 Remove Advertising Remove False Advertising
article thumbnail

California Supreme Court reaffirms strict liability for false advertising in Serova

43(B)log

The statements were “commercial advertising meant to sell a product, and generally there ‘can be no constitutional objection to the suppression of commercial messages that do not accurately inform the public.’” The First Amendment has long coexisted with no-fault false advertising laws. The California Supreme Court reversed.

article thumbnail

Cracks in the foundation: Laches and proximate cause defeat auto glass false advertising claim

43(B)log

Safelite allegedly falsely advertised that (1) “if damage spreads beyond the size of a dollar bill, a replacement will be necessary”; (2) “when a chip is smaller than a dollar bill, it can usually be repaired without replacing the windshield.” Safelite counterclaimed for trade secret theft not related to advertising.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

influencers aren't advertisers' agents, materiality can be common sense, & more in supplement case

43(B)log

Was this commercial advertising or promotion? Elysium argued that the website as a whole was a referral website for Tru Niagen, which advertised Tru Niagen at the top of every page. Thus, any false advertising claim would lie against Albaum, not [directly] against ChromaDex. You can find out more here: [link].

article thumbnail

Grubhub's listing of unaffiliated restaurants on its platform could infringe TM

43(B)log

Restaurants who partner with Grubhub pay it a percentage for “an additional way of generating orders, internet advertising, and a delivery infrastructure.” Plaintiffs alleged that, since its founding (2004), Grubhub only included restaurants on its platform who agreed to appear.

article thumbnail

maintaining ex-employees' voicemail/email doesn't violate Lanham Act or right of publicity

43(B)log

Lanham Act false advertising: Failing to delete email and voicemail accounts is not “commercial advertising or promotion.” Omissions and inactions of this sort do not constitute either ordinary advertising or “a systematic communicative endeavor to persuade possible customers to buy the seller’s product.”

article thumbnail

Gema USA, Inc. Sues Former Employee for Alleged Patent & Trademark Infringement

Indiana Intellectual Property Law

September 14, 2004. 271 , Trademark Infringement, Trademark Counterfeiting, and Unfair Competition, False Designation of Origin, and False Advertising, under 15 U.S.C. §§ 114 and 1125(a). Registration No. Registration Date. OPTISELECT. May 16, 2017. April 29, 2008. April 9, 2019. January 6, 2015.

article thumbnail

Fish & Richardson Elevates 17 Attorneys to Principal 

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

in biochemistry and history from the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities in 2004. Vivian Cheng focuses her practice on trademark and copyright litigation and also counsels clients on a broad range of issues relating to trademark, trade dress, and copyright protection and enforcement, unfair competition, and false advertising.