This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Defendants allegedly copied key components of Trackman’s copyrighted software and falsely suggested, in promotions and advertisements, that defendants were authorized to use the well-known courses in their game. Although the court dismissed a contract claim, copyright and falseadvertising claims survived.
15, 2023) Simpson sued its competitor MiTek for using Simpson part numbers for structural connectors/fasteners for use in the construction industry in its catalogs/other promotional material; the court here, after a nonjury trial before the magistrate judge, rather comprehensively rejects its falseadvertising, trademark, and copyright claims. (It
. § 1117(a)(2), a successful falseadvertising plaintiff can recover the costs of any completed advertising that actually and reasonably responds to the defendant’s offending ads.’” Id. A copy of the Memorandum Opinion is attached.
OSD Audio then sued Outlaw under §512(f), and Outlaw counterclaimed for falseadvertising and unfair competition under the Lanham Act, copyright infringement, and trade libel. Lanham Act: The user manual did not constitute “commercial advertising or promotion.” But “[n]ot all commercial speech is promotional.” Prager Univ.
2, 2022) Before the jury verdict in favor of Monster’s falseadvertising claim was this opinion resolving evidentiary issues. However, they fail to show that Monster dirtied its hands to make the falseadvertising claims now alleged against Defendants.” Monster Energy Co. Vital Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 2022 WL 17218077, No.
In March 2020 (I was going to say mid-March, but I recognize there’s a question about how long March 2020 actually was), he began marketing facemasks, including masks he described as “N95” and “Class N95.” Beginning in April 2020, customers began complaining about not receiving orders. Romero operated a drop-shipping business.
24, 2023) Previous decision here —really interesting attack on internet arbitrage; defendant copied Krikor’s eBay memorabilia photos and listed the memorabilia on its own site with a markup; anyone who bought from defendant would actually have defendant buy from Krikor and drop-shipped to the purchaser. Nor was the use of the photos fair use.
were valid and infringed, but the latter wasn’t counterfeited; SMRI’s dilution victory was vacated, but not its victories on deceptive trade practices, ACPA, falseadvertising, and unfair competition. It was thus barred from equitable relief for its trademark infringement, falseadvertising, and state deceptive trade practices claims.
5, 2021) The plaintiff benefits from very generous treatment of its false designation and copyright claims, in the process stripping false designation of anything other than a prohibition on copying/vitiating both Wal-Mart and Dastar. Simpson sells structural connectors for use in building construction.
CV 19-5495-MWF (JCx), 2020 WL 9073046 (C.D. 16, 2020) Russell owns registered copyrights in certain photos of sculptures that appeared on Walmart’s marketplace. Walmart Inc., Previously, the court found that all of Walmart’s affirmative defenses failed as a matter of law, except its DMCA defense, which remains for trial.
3d 1370, 2020 USPQ2d 10837 at *3 (Fed. 2020), cert. 3d 1298, 2020 USPQ2d 11277, at * 6-7 (Fed. 2020), cert. Entitlement to a statutory cause of action is a threshold requirement of every inter partes case. Australian Therapeutic Supplies Pty. Naked TM, LLC , 965 F.3d denied , 142 S.Ct. 82 ( (citing Lexmark Int’l, Inc.
For example, in 2020, @karmanverdi – a Russian Musical Artist – created a novel approach to take photos in Lockdown and titled the series “There are so many ghosts at my site.” Falseadvertising should be avoided when defaming a product. Obtain legal ownership verification. Make intangible assets.
In 2020, the plaintiff learned that “Defendant was using Plaintiff’s Marks in online tamale advertisements and in Google AdWords, which placed Defendant’s products above Plaintiff’s products in search results for the phrase ‘Texas Tamale.'” Allied Modular * Griper’s Keyword Ads May Constitute FalseAdvertising (Huh?)–LoanStreet
The trial court found Ethicon committed 153,351 violations of the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and 121,844 violations of the FalseAdvertising Law (FAL) and imposed a $1,250 civil penalty for each violation. And it’s inconsistent with Zauderer and its progeny. But it was not an abuse of discretion to do what the trial court did.
Certain procedural requirements: must be able to see & save a copy of the disclosures/contract w/in 15 days, via email receipt for example. Frida Mom’s ads showing reality of postpartum recovery rejected from 2020 Oscars for being too graphic—at least get some PR benefit from that. Chance-based contests may not need a permit.
Since early 2020, Defendant Nepute and Quickwork have used several platforms, including social media, emails, and radio, to tout the purported benefits of Vitamin D and zinc and to promote Wellness Warrior supplements. ” The COVID-19 Act was enacted on December 27, 2020.
In March 2020, Healthvana objected, and Telebrands’ counsel indicated that it would rebrand as “Handvana.” “By Healthvana sued in May 2020 for trademark infringement, unfair competition, and falseadvertising in violation of both federal and state law, as well for cybersquatting under ACPA. Surprised?
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content