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
Skillz sued its competitor Papaya, alleging falseadvertising under federal and state law. Skillz allegedly markets its games as being uniquely fair and trustworthy with a badge indicating it is Committed to Fair Play and a claim that it will [m]atch [users] with real players of equal skill in its games. Skillz Platform Inc.
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.
In responding to the unprecedented COVID-19 challenges, companies around the world are rushing to capitalize on the current crisis by advertising the effectiveness of their products in containing the virus spread. As fear and anxiety proliferate during this pandemic, fraudulent or falseadvertisements also surge and explode.
Brough Brothers alleged that Fresh Bourbon falselyadvertised that Fresh Bourbon is the first black-owned bourbon distillery in Kentucky, and made other related claims. Thus, the actual statement wasnt literally false, given the Senate resolution, even if the resolution was drafted by Fresh Bourbons representatives.
Also, there should not be a “use in commerce” when the advertiser (here, Troia) doesn’t actually offer any goods or services in the marketplace. As the court says later, “it seems unlikely that an Internet user who reads defendant’s advertisements would believe that they belong to or are endorsed by plaintiffs.”
The Ninth Circuit has held: “[i]n some cases, the threat of future harm may be the consumer’s plausible allegations that she will be unable to rely on the product’s advertising or labeling in the future, and so will not purchase the product although she would like to.”
In summer 2020, AHBP began negotiating with the Lynd defendants for the exclusive license to market and sell a surface disinfectant/cleaner known as “Bioprotect 500” in Argentina. Lynd advertised the Product as effective against the coronavirus. the Lanham Act falseadvertising claim survived.
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?
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.
14, 2021) Dawgs alleged that Crocs falselymarketed its shoes in violation of the Lanham Act by advertising Croslite, the foam material that Crocs shoes are made from, as “patented,” “proprietary,” and “exclusive.” Effervescent, Inc., 2021 WL 4170997, No. 06-cv-00605-PAB-KMT, No. 16-cv-02004-PAB-KMT (D.
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. NatureWise’s products advertised that they met the same Dr. Oz-endorsed requirements. Heartwise, Inc.,
But when advertising or marketing materials overstate the scope of patent or other IP rights, they may create the risk of a falseadvertising claim. Patented technologies or features can be valuable selling points, setting your products apart from the competition. By: Fenwick & West LLP
Amazon is an ICS provider: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants “market” and “sell” products to retail consumers “through internet websites.” The plaintiff claimed that Amazon bears the responsibility to verify advertiser claims and product authenticity. This argument has failed so many times.
17, 2023) Another entry in the “courts treat Lanham Act falseadvertising very differently than Lanham Act trademark infringement, despite identical damages provisions” line. CareDx sued Natera for falseadvertising. Natera, Inc., 19-662-CFC, 2023 WL 4561059 (D. Natera made superiority claims for its Prospera.
26, 2024) The parties compete in the hand-held gardening tool market. Fiskars alleged that Woodland engaged in falseadvertising when it described its Regular Duty Bypass Pruner as “designed in the USA” because Woodland actually copied Fiskars’s version of the tool—which would mean that Woodland did not design its tools at all.
Here, plaintiffs alleged that TFL and Nelson had actual knowledge: they knew how the fraudulent scheme worked, that they were shipping products sold using deceptive and unfair advertising, that the ads and websites were false and misleading, and the nature of the tortious conduct being committed by Beyond Global and Doe defendants.
8, 2023) When does TM logic creep into falseadvertising cases? Tundra allegedly uses the information it scrapes from Faire’s platform, including contact information, to market its product. The screenshot was “commercial advertising or promotion.” Faire Wholesale, Inc. Tundra, Inc., 2023 WL 8586681, No.
12, 2023) Following a large verdict for Monster on falseadvertising claims, this opinion discusses extensively the requirements for injunctive relief in falseadvertising cases. Are lost prospective customers and market share purely economic harms? So too with lost market share.
22, 2022) The court here allows an antitrust claim to proceed based in part on allegedly false/misleading statements because they form part of the alleged anticompetitive product-hopping scheme and because the unique characteristics of the drug market make market-based responses to falseadvertising difficult.
As far as the Court can tell, … PIRG does no work addressing false or misleading labeling for bed sheets, textiles more generally, or even falseadvertising as a category. So what was the problem? The cy pres doctrine simply allows for a distribution that achieves those benefits indirectly.”
Boston Carriage’s principals voluntarily shared their business knowledge with Boston Suburban, including Boston Carriage’s business and marketing strategies and its online presence.” It also allegedly resumed promoting and advertising the domain name “logan-car-service.com” and re-routing visitors to its own website.
January 5, 2022), the Court granted Defendant Next Caller’s post-trial renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law of no falseadvertising under the Lanham Act and to take away the jury’s award of punitive damages. The Court granted Defendant’s motion for two reasons. A copy of the Memorandum Opinion is attached.
The statements were “commercial advertising meant to sell a product, and generally there ‘can be no constitutional objection to the suppression of commercial messages that do not accurately inform the public.’” Not all marketing of artistic works is noncommercial speech. The California Supreme Court reversed.
It advertised “This device was one of the most popular items on a popular 3D printing website with over 20,000 unique downloads” on its website, at a time when Leszczynski’s Thingiverse page displayed that his Cube had been downloaded 20,000 times. Falseadvertising: Only ok against Kitchen Cube.
To many trademark owners, it’s a simple decision to sue when the advertiser includes the trademark in the ad copy. As I teach my students, Porta-Fab should have spent its enforcement budget on more marketing instead of more lawyers, which almost certainly would produce a higher ROI than this lawsuit did. 2022 WL 4596646 (C.D.
Republic alleged that HBI, its competitor in the tobacco rolling paper industry, engaged in falseadvertising under the Lanham Act, unfair competition, and violations of the IUDTPA. Also, a company’s belief that its advertising is important and profitable “is not evidence that the advertising actually had that effect.”
You can see Seeking Arrangements’ ad (highlighted) showing above Luxy’s own ad and mixed in with ads for unrelated products: The court says: Plaintiffs’ advertisement does not contain the word “Luxy” or appear to cause any more confusion than the other three advertisements. More Posts About Keyword Advertising.
25 2023) Previous district court opinion allowing Lanham Act falseadvertising claims to proceed against Microsoft; applying the Article III analysis that doesn’t (yet?) TocMail launched its IP-evasion product, got a patent, and then sued Microsoft for falseadvertising—all within two months.” TocMail, Inc.
7, 2022) The court upheld a contempt finding based on an underlying falseadvertising claim. The underlying permanent injunction barred defendants from suggesting in promotional materials that their probiotic contained the same formulation as one marketed by De Simone. and many markets globally.” “So
30, 2024) (R&R) Recommendation: Dastar should block Qingdao’s Lanham Act falseadvertising counterclaims based on Lashify’s claim to be the originator of lash technology, but false patent marking counterclaims should survive. Qingdao Lashbeauty Cosmetic Co., 2024 WL 629985, No. W-22-CV-00776-ADA-DTG, No. 1, 2017 to Apr.
30, 2025) This is a ruling on 19 motions to exclude expert testimony in this case, which is mostly an antitrust case; I will focus only on some falseadvertising-relevant rulings. Butler was an expert on survey research, market research, sampling, and statistical analysis.
InterNACHI argued that ASHI’s tagline constituted Lanham Act falseadvertising because it portrays ASHI’s entire membership as being educated, tested, verified, and certified, even though its membership includes so-called “novice” inspectors who have yet to complete training or become certified.
2, 2024) Noriega alleged that Abbott’s PediaSure falselyadvertised that it was “[c]linically proven to help kids grow.” Abbott Laboratories, F.Supp.3d 3d -, 2024 WL 402925, No. 4014 (PAE) (S.D.N.Y. The complaint made methodological critiques of Abbott’s favored studies, which weren’t implausible.
The first pegfilgrastim biosimilar hit the market in November 2018, and would ultimately be followed by five others, including Sandoz’s Ziextenzo in November 2019. These ads were based on an obseivational study Amgen conducted itself, in an effort to remain competitive with the emerging biosimilar market. Sandoz Inc.
The advertising bit: Defendants allegedly misled New York customers into “believing that unfinished frames and receivers are legal workarounds to New York’s gun control laws, as well as federal law.” Defendants contended that marketing unfinished frames and receivers as “legal” was protected by the First Amendment. It was not.
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
Eric Goldman 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. What Does the Book Cover?
Fifteen years ago, courts generally avoided categorical pronouncements about the legitimacy of competitive keyword advertising. The message from the Second Circuit is plain: stop bringing competitive keyword advertising cases. This ruling doesn’t address the scenario where the advertiser’s ad copy references the trademark.
12, 2024) The court denied certification to a proposed class of dentists/orthodontists over SDC’s allegedly falseadvertising for its plastic aligners/teledentistry services, based on difficulties identifying harm/causation. Thus, causation/harm would predominate.
This case hit my alerts because of its discussion about keyword advertising, but first, I have to digest how the court got there. We usually get ours at the local farmers market.] Yum, and easily veganized. ” Say what? ” That prompted this litigation. ” UGH.
Because Eli Lilly places patient safety at the forefront, the company has been alarmed by the dangers of Totality Medispa’s products being falselymarketed as FDA-approved tirzepatide, Mounjaro®, or Zepbound®. Any product labeled as “tirzepatide” that is not sold by Lilly is not FDA-approved and could be dangerous.
The result is that FedEx routes are, as a practical matter, intangible commodities traded on a competitive market and subject to price fluctuation based on the actual or perceived value of each individual route. Was this “commercial advertising or promotion”? FedEx brought Lanham Act and Tennessee Consumer Protection Act claims.
These garbage disposals tend to match the same horsepower advertised by InSinkErator on its disposals, but at a cheaper price. This signals that horsepower is an importantif not primarydistinction used by retailers to market to consumers. That bolstered the common sense impression that more horsepower means more efficiency.
Was this commercial advertising or promotion? Elysium argued that Right of Assembly was “a marketing website for Tru Niagen for which ChromaDex pays commissions to Shelly Albaum for Tru Niagen customers referred through the website.” Thus, any falseadvertising claim would lie against Albaum, not [directly] against ChromaDex.
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