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
I’ll focus, as usual, on the falseadvertising bits and ignore the securities law parts. This statement was plausibly false when made. The FAL explicitly provides that plaintiffs can recover for advertisements that were “known, or which by the exercise of reasonable care should be known, to be untrue or misleading.”
Here, the court dismisses the fraud claim on statute of limitations grounds and the Lanham Act claim because of a mismatch between the commercial advertising and promotion alleged and the falsity alleged, but allows injurious falsehood/product disparagement claims to proceed. What about commercial advertising or promotion?
Vivian Cheng focuses her practice on trademark and copyright litigation and also counsels clients on a broad range of issues relating to trademark, trade dress, and copyright protection and enforcement, unfair competition, and falseadvertising. She received her J.D. with honors from Emory University School of Law in 2014 and her B.S.
May 19, 2023) Whereas the timeshare falseadvertising cases might be making law largely applicable to other timeshare cases, what’s going on in the strip club advertising cases might have somewhat broader implications. The district court concluded that plaintiffs’ false endorsement claims were foreclosed by Electra v.
The suit also included a claim of falseadvertising after Online2LiveStream transformed itself into a scam site, offering events in exchange for credit card details but failing to deliver. Insufficent DueDiligence – Court Dismisses Case. Court Warns Case Could Be Dismissed.
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