Remove Advertising Remove Copying Remove False Advertising Remove Reporting
article thumbnail

Using dominant competitor's part names/numbers for comparison isn't false advertising, TM infringement, or (c) infringement

43(B)log

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 false advertising, trademark, and copyright claims. (It

article thumbnail

TIL: “Texas Tamale” Is an Enforceable Trademark–Texas Tamale v. CPUSA2

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

This case hit my alerts because of its discussion about keyword advertising, but first, I have to digest how the court got there. June 26, 2019), report and recommendation adopted, No. Still, there should be many circumstances where descriptive fair use permits the defendant to use the term “Texas tamale” in the ad copy.

Trademark 100
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

LinkedIn posts weren't commercial advertising or promotion for pediatric orthopedics

43(B)log

They alleged that defendants copied the program and infringed the patent, as well as engaged in a smear campaign against plaintiffs in an effort to steal market share in the pediatric orthopedic industry. I’m only going to discuss the false advertising aspects. The answer depends on industry practice.

article thumbnail

9th Circuit courts are very committed to letting juries hear testimony about surveys

43(B)log

2, 2022) Before the jury verdict in favor of Monster’s false advertising claim was this opinion resolving evidentiary issues. They weren’t directly asked about the phrase “Super Creatine,” whether participants had prior experiences with or opinions of Bang, or whether they had seen Vital’s advertising in the market.

article thumbnail

Dish & Sling Sue ‘Pirate’ IPTV Operation For Circumventing Widevine DRM

TorrentFreak

Besides the sticker promos, the plaintiffs also ran into several advertisements on Facebook and even flyers in physical stores throughout Atlanta. Flyers As shown above, these flyers advertised the IPTV streaming service as an “Authorized Retailer” for Dish and Sling, which people could “WATCH FOR $7/mo.”

article thumbnail

comparison charts might infringe if lacking a disclaimer

43(B)log

24, 2022) This seems like a silly result to me, shifting the burden to comparative advertisers, but it's often much harder to get summary judgment in a trademark case than in comparable cases. PennEngineering claims a PEM family of marks and sued Peninsula for trademark infringement, counterfeiting, false advertising, and unfair competition.

article thumbnail

Dark Patterns Unmasked: Examining Their Influence on Digital Platforms and User Behaviour

SpicyIP

Interface interference is a tactic that hinders consumers from performing actions like cancelling subscriptions or deleting accounts, such as redirecting them to another page while trying to cancel a pop-up advertisement. YouTube also earns from advertisers by inserting video ads and allowing longer ads.