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
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. ” Dawgs brief.
The court says that Amazon “easily satisfies” this factor: Plaintiff’s claims are all based on the theory that Defendants ‘continue to allow unlawful sellers to maintain their accounts’ and ‘permit them to advertise’ on Defendants’ website. Last week I blogged M.S. Google opinion.
Rebecca Tushnet and I are pleased to announce the sixth edition of our casebook, Advertising & Marketing Law: Cases & Materials. We also have two online-only chapters on housing discrimination (Chapter 20) and political advertising (Chapter 21), both also freely downloadable. Chapter 2: What is an Advertisement?
27, 2023) Proceedings below most recently blogged here. Vitamins Online sued Heartwise under the Lanham Act and Utah’s Unfair Competition Law for falseadvertising about the ingredients of its competitive nutritional supplements and manipulating those products’ Amazon reviews. Heartwise, Inc., 4th -, 2023 WL 4189604, Nos.
Rebecca Tushnet and I are pleased to announce the seventh edition of our casebook, Advertising & Marketing Law: Cases & Materials. We also have two online-only chapters on housing discrimination (Chapter 20) and political advertising (Chapter 21), both also freely downloadable. Price: $12 * Kindle.
8, 2023) When does TM logic creep into falseadvertising cases? The screenshot was “commercial advertising or promotion.” On materiality, it sufficed to allege that brands pay for its services and Tundra’s falseadvertising influences brands to purchase Tundra’s services instead of Faire’s services. Tundra, Inc.,
One of Elysium’s counterclaims was based on statements that appeared on a blog, Right of Assembly, upwards of 20 times: ChromaDex isn’t allowed to say that NR treats any disease, because the FDA has not approved that. Was this commercial advertising or promotion? You can find out more here: [link]. I would have thought that was enough.]
The falseadvertising claim fails because Lops didn’t show that the videos “are commercial speech and made for the purpose of influencing consumers to buy YouTube’s goods or services.” YouTube appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. ” Cites to Tiffany v. eBay and Sellify v.
13, 2023) I don’t usually blog default cases because there’s usually little legal analysis; this case is an exception around the fraught area of first sale, showing unusual diligence by the court. Quincy Bioscience, LLC v. BRYK Enters., LLC, 2023 WL 2933464, No. 22-cv-658-jdp (W.D. Even after default.
Lanham Act FalseAdvertising. Enigma claimed it was false for Malwarebytes to call its programs “malicious,” “threats,” and PUPs. Malwarebytes , the court held that such labels were subjective opinions, not verifiably false. The legacy of Justice Thomas’ blogging will live on long after the Enigma case is over.
Each side alleged falseadvertising by the other, primarily that each falselyadvertised their products as containing enteric coating, which protects an enzyme from the stomach’s acidic environment and preserves its activity until it reaches the small intestine.
The post Hello, You’ve Been Referred Here Because You’re Wrong About Web Scraping Laws (Guest Blog Post, Part 2 of 2) appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. Eric’s closing note: for more on that latter point, see my decade-old thinkpiece on online trespass to chattels.].
Is it falseadvertising for Facebook to describe the groups as “private”? Does that create a claim for falseadvertising? HDR appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. (But Facebook’s content wasn’t snarfed, and the mods may not care as much as other users). June 8, 2022).
FalseAdvertising. In general, courts should not permit a falseadvertising claim based on a “safe” representation where the representation is rendered untrue by third-party content. Apple appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. eBay case from 2008.
26, 2022) [much other stuff skipped] The parties had a falseadvertising dispute that went to a jury, which found that FIGS wasn’t liable for falselyadvertising the antimicrobial properties of its scrubs. Since the court had some interesting evidentiary rulings, I’m blogging that here.
This is yet another blog post about 50 Cent a/k/a Curtis Jackson. If the clinic is falsely claiming that he is, that’s falseadvertising and possibly defamation. The Twitter previews juxtaposing the 50 Cent photo with the eggplant photo aren’t necessarily in the advertiser’s control. ” Ha!
More Posts About Keyword Advertising. Ohio Bans Competitive Keyword Advertising by Lawyers. Perfect Body Image. * The Florida Bar Regulates, But Doesn’t Ban, Competitive Keyword Ads. * Rounding Up Three Recent Keyword Advertising Cases–Comphy v. Google cases. Want to Engage in Anti-Competitive Trademark Bullying? Greenberg v.
30, 2024) I don’t usually blog default judgments, but this one was interesting. Plaintiff was required to plead falseadvertising with specificity, then prove it.” This is a falseadvertising case, not a counterfeiting case. Usually, a falseadvertising injunction stops false statements about products.
JC Penny, for example, has been hit with a class action lawsuit in the Southern District of California over its alleged advertising practice of using “false reference pricing.” Carranza claims that JC Penny falselyadvertises its products on its e-commerce website by listing a high reference price and the corresponding sale price.
After remand, the case went back to the Ninth Circuit, which held that anti-threat classifications might be Lanham Act falseadvertising. Today I’m blogging the district court decision after that remand. Lanham Act Commercial Advertising or Promotion. The result is ugly. I really do hate this case.
He then sued the court document repository websites (and other defendants) for defamation, falseadvertising, and more. Microsoft appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. In 2020, Medina got the disclosures from the 2014 case sealed. The trial court anti-SLAPPED that lawsuit. The appeals court affirms.
1, 2024) NYU Langone sued Northwell for trade dress infringement, unfair competition and false designation of origin, and falseadvertising under the Lanham Act, as well as related claims under the New York GBL and New York common law. The court dismissed the complaint—the falseadvertising claims with prejudice.
A couple of specifics: The falseadvertising claims don’t escape 230: “Had those third-party users refrained from posting harmful content, Plaintiffs’ claims that Defendants falselyadvertised and misrepresented their applications’ safety would not be cognizable.” ICS Provider. The complaint.
This is a falseadvertising lawsuit again the mobile app game Game of Thrones: Conquest. appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. The account formation process included a screen where a user could proceed only by clicking on the “play” button: Warner Bros. sought to send the case to arbitration.
And then…the Ninth Circuit got the case again… The Majority Opinion After the Supreme Court cert denial, the district court ruled that Malwarebytes’ “malicious” and “threat” classifications were “non-actionable statements of opinion” and thus could not support a Lanham Act falseadvertising claim.
18, 2022) Previous discussion (one of four opinions in the case that I blogged). The district court remitted the falseadvertising damage award from over $8,000,000 to under $85,000 to reflect that it wasn’t sure whether Utah residents (the ones surveyed) had the same definition of “local” as others.
22, 2022) This is a super messy case with a lot going on; I’m going to blog about it mainly to highlight a new thing you can apparently do with a trademark application , which is use it on non-Amazon platforms to gain advantages. Even without standing, Jones failed to state a claim for false association or falseadvertising.
He paid money to get extra visibility for his dating profile and claims he got poor results, so he sued Bumble for falseadvertising. Bumble appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. Alkutkar used the dating app Bumble. Bumble successfully redirects the case to arbitration based on its TOS.
In addition to the previous causes of action, Nike has asked the court to add counterfeiting and falseadvertising claims against StockX. On May 10 th 2022, Nike filed a memo in support of its motion for leave to file a first amended complaint in a revised lawsuit.
This case, where the legal holding is that the central advertising claims are just puffery, is a good illustration of the problem. Its blog said: “Pure, therapeutic-grade essential oils can have therapeutic effects on their users. The advertising describes “intangible, non-measurable benefit[s] akin to puffery.”
. “there is no doubt that the complaint treats Google as the publisher or speaker of information… the plaintiff’s causes of action against Google rest solely on the theory that Google did not block a third-party advertisement for publication on its search pages. ” The ad came from a third-party. Google LLC , 2023 U.S.
Netaifm alleged that defendants engaged in anticompetitive market behavior when the Jain entities acquired majority shares of two local design firms, which connect manufacturers to growers, and alleged falseadvertising. Jain is Netafim’s largest competitor. The court was unimpressed by Jain’s quibbles with particular statements.
However, because Plaintiffs do not earn revenue from consumers who utilize services from a Martino-endorsed company, the fact that HomeAdvisor earned revenue from its ads does not demonstrate that Defendants’ advertisements caused any revenue to be diverted away from Plaintiffs.” ” * Boost Beauty, LLC v.
The majority says “if likeness interests are disregarded on the internet, the incentives to build an excellent commercial reputation for endorsements may diminish…information provided by promotional advertisements can enhance market efficiency and vibrancy” but these are orthogonal statements. (I
It alleged that defendants unlawfully conspired to restrain trade in violation of the Sherman Act and that NABP engaged in falseadvertising in violation of the Lanham Act. Lanham Act claims against NABP: “NABP’s website claims that sites on its Not Recommended List are unsafe and illegal, including Plaintiff’s website and blog.”
Falseadvertising: Overjet challenged statements that allegedly falsely indicated that (1) “Videa’s software is safe and effective for various medical purposes,” even though it had not obtained the relevant FDA clearance, and (2) it had “reached a technological milestone in AI development before Overjet.” Overjet, Inc.
20, 2022) Plaintiff PCC sued NABP, a nonprofit whose membership consists of state/similar political unit boards of pharmacy (some other pharmacy associations/partnerships are also separate defendants), alleging violations of the Sherman Act and falseadvertising under the Lanham Act. pharmacies.”
This blog intends to explore this fine line as well as means to navigate this issue at hand to properly protect and encourage environmentalism and prevent these business giants from misusing trademarks to foster consumer trust. A class action could also be initiated by the consumers themselves as a whole, being victims of falseadvertising.
and other unfair acts such as misappropriation of trade secrets, falseadvertising, breach of contract, and antitrust violations. The post Once Again, the ITC Finishes the Year with a Flurry of New Complaints appeared first on Global IP & Technology Law Blog. In comparison to litigating in U.S.
.” The agency stated in a press release that “boosting your products by hijacking another product’s ratings or reviews is a relatively new tactic, but is still plain old falseadvertising.” ” An FTC blog described this case as “ Mutiny on the Bountiful.” Let’s unpack this.
It brought Lanham Act and California FAL/UCL claims over defendants’ allegedly falseadvertising of their respective OTC lidocaine patches. Such a rule would allow any manner of misleading advertisement.” back and spinal pain). But that’s not relevant to the lost profits argument, which is part of causation.
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