article thumbnail

False Patent Marking as False Advertising: Overcoming Dastar

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch The Federal Circuit is set to consider the use of terms like “patented,” “proprietary,” and “exclusive” in commercial advertising can be actionable under § 43(a)(1)(B) of the Lanham Act when their use is not entirely accurate. Crocs largely prevailed in those actions.

article thumbnail

Lower Price Alternative? Comparative Advertising and Trademark Infringement

IPilogue

Comparative advertising is an effective marketing technique, in which a company’s product or service is compared to its competitor’s. Despite these advantages, comparative advertising is a dangerous field to navigate from a legal perspective. Tianchu Gao is an IPilogue Writer and a 1L JD Candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School. .

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Advertisers Beware: Falsely Advertising Products as “Patented” and “Proprietary” Can Violate the Lanham Act, Says the Federal Circuit

JD Supra Law

Effervescent, the Federal Circuit ruled that falsely advertising that a product feature is patented can constitute a violation of the Lanham Act. All the way back in 2006, Crocs sued several competitor shoe distributors for patent infringement. On October 3, 2024, in Crocs v. By: Sunstein LLP

article thumbnail

CAFC Addresses Standing Requirement in Brooklyn Brew Shop Trademark Dispute

IP Watchdog

For over 30 years, The Brooklyn Brewery Corporation (Brewery) has used the marks BROOKLYN and BROOKLYN BREWERY in connection with the advertising, promotion, and sale of Brewery’s beer and beer-related merchandise. In 2006, Brewery registered BROOKLYN BREWERY as a federal trademark for beer in class 32.

Trademark 119
article thumbnail

UK Court Hands Down Suspended Jail Sentence to eBay Seller of Pirate IPTV Boxes

TorrentFreak

Trading Standards officers bought three devices that worked as advertised. Mr. Al-Saegh was confronted with the evidence at the City of London Magistrates Court this summer, where he pleaded guilty to multiple violations of the Fraud Act 2006. This resulted in a raid on the man’s house where more boxes were found.

article thumbnail

over dissent, 9th Cir. denies injury presumption to false advertising claimant

43(B)log

7, 2021) Quidel appealed the grant of summary judgment to Siemens on Quidel’s Lanham Act false advertising claims and related state claims. Quidel alleged that Siemens advertised (1) but provided (2). And there was no triable issue on actual injury based on allegedly false advertising to the physicians. 388, 391 (2006).” [Not

article thumbnail

Hot n Cold ruling from Australian Federal Court partially overturns Katy Perry trade mark decision

The IPKat

Her management team set up a web-store by 24 September 2008 to advertise and sell such merchandise. Infringing clothing was also advertised and sold under the Katy Perry mark by the companies Blackout Merch and Epic Rights. Sometimes, that's what you get for waking up in Federal Court.