Remove Advertising Remove Contracts Remove False Advertising Remove Information
article thumbnail

Retailer has standing to assert Lanham Act false advertising claims against its own supplier

43(B)log

Lynd advertised the Product as effective against the coronavirus. Ultimately, AHBP took an exclusive license to sell the product in Argentina, with purchasing and advertising/marketing spend minimums. the Lanham Act false advertising claim survived.

article thumbnail

False advertising about a bankrupt competitor doesn't violate the automatic stay

43(B)log

6, 2022) The district court reverses the bankruptcy court ruling ( discussed here ) that held that false advertising had interfered with the debtor’s estate in violation of the automatic stay. Windstream has a 2-year contract. With Spectrum there are no contracts. for the losses caused thereby.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

TM claimant may add false advertising claims as direct competitor

43(B)log

Entrepreneur’s desire to bring forth a claim for false advertising against a competitor in a similar market is not unusual behavior.” Along with adding a defendant, Entrepreneur might eventually be allowed to add a false advertising claim, based on facts that were allegedly discovered only during Roach’s deposition.

article thumbnail

sending emails under former employees' names may be reverse passing off

43(B)log

CCM counterclaimed for abuse of process and for violations of the Lanham Act and related state laws; one ex-employee also brought counterclaims against loanDepot for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The false association/coordinate state law claims survived. Ankura Consulting Grp.,

article thumbnail

Claims that timeshare exit services are legal and effective were not puffery

43(B)log

11, 2021) Another timeshare versus timeshare exit false advertising case. Marketing Defendants allegedly falsely advertise timeshare exit services by promoting a legitimate process to exit timeshare contracts. First, the court rejected the argument that Rule 9(b) applied to the false advertising claims.

article thumbnail

contributory liability possible for lawyers in timeshare exit cases

43(B)log

The lawyer defendants allegedly interfered with the timeshare contracts by (1) participating in the marketing defendants’ false and misleading advertising; (2) encouraging or directing the nonpayment of fees owed to Diamond; and (3) keeping the owners in the dark regarding the adverse financial consequences resulting from the nonpayment of fees.

article thumbnail

YouTube Isn’t Liable for User Uploads of Animal Abuse Videos–Lady Freethinker v. YouTube

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Thus, Lady Freethinker sued YouTube for breach of contract and related claims. (A Rather than engaging this contract law issue directly, the court rules for YouTube on Section 230 grounds: Lady Freethinker’s claims ultimately seek to treat Google as the publisher or speaker of content provided by another information content provider.