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
Rebecca Tushnet and I are pleased to announce the sixth edition of our casebook, Advertising & Marketing Law: Cases & Materials. Chapter 2: What is an Advertisement? Chapter 3: FalseAdvertising Overview. Chapter 9: FalseAdvertising Practice and Remedies. Price: $12. Chapter 4: Deception.
Amazon is an ICS provider: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants “market” and “sell” products to retail consumers “through internet websites.” “Plaintiff does not allege that any of the products that purportedly contain falseadvertising use its marks “Planet Green” or “Doorstepink.”
Rebecca Tushnet and I are pleased to announce the seventh edition of our casebook, Advertising & Marketing Law: Cases & Materials. Preface Chapter 1: Overview Chapter 2: What is an Advertisement? Chapter 3: FalseAdvertising Overview Chapter 4: Deception Chapter 5: Which Facts Matter? Price: $12 * Kindle.
8, 2023) When does TM logic creep into falseadvertising cases? Tundra solicits sellers on Faire’s platform to provide their Faire Direct links to retailers registered with Tundra by “promising to promote their brands to new retailers and give them greater exposure” to Tundra retailers. Faire Wholesale, Inc. Tundra, Inc.,
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.
Image from here Manu Bhaker’s Olympics Victory: Do Brands Violate Publicity Rights by Putting out Congratulatory Posts? Moment marketing” refers to a strategy where brands can take advantage of ongoing events to gain relevance, and especially for some of the sheen of patriotic athletic victories to wear off on them.
Copper Compression Brands LLC, 2021 WL 5013799, No. 27, 2021) Ideavillage sued CCB for trademark infringement and false designation of origin related to Ideavillage’s “Copper Fit” line of copper-infused compression garments. Here, the court granted leave to amend to add a falseadvertising claim. 4604 (KPF) (S.D.N.Y.
A jury found that defendant HBI engaged in unfair competition and violated the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act (IUDTPA” in its packaging and promotional activities for its RAW Organic Hemp branded tobacco rolling paper products. The court granted an injunction focusing on the Alcoy claims, which were false.
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. brewer works only with Keurig brand or licensed pods) but some did not (e.g., I prefer the taste of Keurig or Keurig-licensed brands.).
Other defendants manufactured and sold the Cube with their unique branding through Kitchen Cube’s affiliate program. Kitchen Cube cube Leszczynski sued for (1) copyright infringement; (2) violation of Creative Commons license terms; and (3) falseadvertising and misrepresentation. Falseadvertising: Only ok against Kitchen Cube.
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. There was also no copyright preemption.
I won’t say much about that, though I do have a big question, but there are also falseadvertising aspects of the case. The parties compete in the market for adjustable air mattresses and related products. Baxter; 996 F.3d 3d 925 (8 th Cir. How much of this is even relevant for determining whether IIC exists?
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.
He alleges that YouTube sold items under the “Confidence Empire” brand and published videos from a dance troupe named Confidence Empire (maybe this one ?). YouTube appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. Leonel Lops claims a trademark in the term “Confidence Empire” for shoes. eBay and Sellify v.
Vampire Family Brands, LLC v. MPL Brands, Inc., Unsurprisingly, the trademark claims survive a motion to dismiss, but associated falseadvertising claims don’t. It seems more like a concession of lack of market penetration if you have to rely on your own website and the PTO’s records to show public recognition!]
Fashion is a brand-driven industry, and few brands in the fashion space carry the same cachet as Chanel. But how much control do brands like Chanel have over merchants who resell name-brand items in the secondary market? The answer, according to a federal jury in the Southern District of New York, is “Quite a bit.”
4, 2024) Finding Zesty Paws’ “#1 Brand” claim literally false, the court grants a preliminary injunction despite Zesty Paws’ attempt to create a factual dispute about what a “brand” is. Nutramax and Zesty Paws are direct competitors in the pet supplement market. It’s used on every package and in advertising.
Amazon and plaintiffs proposed adding identifiers for three specific models of Rofeer-branded breathalyzers, not just one model. But how can the Court permanently enjoin the sales of three specific products, when there is only an allegation or evidence supporting at most one product being falselyadvertised?
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. ” Limitation of Liability.
Eric Goldman and I are pleased to announce the seventh edition of our casebook, Advertising & Marketing Law: Cases & Materials. Preface Chapter 1: Overview Chapter 2: What is an Advertisement? Chapter 3: FalseAdvertising Overview Chapter 4: Deception Chapter 5: Which Facts Matter? Price: $12 * Kindle.
Shingle Savers counterclaimed, alleging, among other things, falseadvertising under the Lanham Act and violation of the Ohio Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Moreover, the alleged misrepresentations concerned the nature of Roof Maxx’s own roofing Product and were presented in official marketing material and conversations.
Both sides now claim the other is liable for falseadvertising, among other claims.” Defendants also allegedly infringed RCI’s trademarks by using photographs of Roberto Coin jewelry and RCI’s logo in Kings Stone’s advertising after RCI terminated the relationship. Instagram ultimately removed the posts.
TaylorMade Golf Company teed off a dispute over golf club design and filed a patent infringement lawsuit on January 31 st, 2024, in the Southern District of California against Costco and Southern California Design Company alleging infringement and falseadvertising relating to five of TaylorMade’s patents related to golf irons.
This has led to consumers opting for brands that pledge their duty to contributing towards environmental protection by means of minimalism and sustainability. In today’s era of eco-branding, wherein trademarks are used to distinguish sustainable brands from the mainstream commercial ones, the latter engage in the practise of “greenwashing”.
. (“Chanel”), is an iconic fashion company based in New York known for its luxury fashion products and owns rights to several Chanel and CC monograms trademarks associated with the brand design. The brand was not involved with selling secondly handed or vintage goods. Veronique Idea Corp., 2d 262, 267 (S.D.N.Y.
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.” Despite Doe v. LEXIS 5481 (C.D.
WowWee’s Vice President of Brand Development & Creative Strategy, Sydney Wiseman, used her WowWee email address to create a Roblox user account and used her Roblox account to promote My Avastars dolls on social media, including videos on her TikTok account.
11, 2025) This discovery dispute says some interesting things about gray market goods. Toyota argued that if Allen plans to argue that the Toyota Branded Parts it sells are covered by some type of Manufacturer Warranty as advertised to the consuming public, Toyota is entitled to know what warranties, if any, are offered by Allens suppliers.
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. Internet Brands. In Asurvio v. Bleeping Computer. Blog post on that ruling.
Fresh Bourbon allegedly falselyadvertises that Fresh Bourbon is the “first black-owned bourbon distillery in Kentucky,” and makes other related false claims, which is allegedly false because it’s not a distillery, which requires both federal (TTB) and Kentucky (KABC) licenses. POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co.,
It provides farmers, ranchers, and butchers with marketing education and technical assistance; incubates “Meat Collectives” across the country; and educates consumers about responsible meat production and consumption practices. GOOD Meat, Inc., 3d - , 2024 WL 1083462, No. 23-cv-04145-RFL (N.D. Disfavors confusion.
The non-fungible part means that it is something that has unique value based on the buyer’s sentiment and/or market dynamics. In practice, what this means is that a whole new market has been opened-up as NFTs have provided a system that has enabled the sale of digital items by transforming them into collectables, such as a tweet.
16, 2024) Plaintiffs alleged that Bayer falselyadvertised One A Day Natural Fruit Bites Multivitamin products as “natural” even though they “contain non-natural, synthetic ingredients.” But Bayer’s vice president of marketing mentioned that she “would keep [the word “natural”] to test.” 22-cv-1085-MMA (JLB) (C.D.
The court says that trademark law: permits the use of trade names as long as referencing other brand names does not confuse consumers and is not deceptive. Google appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. However, Edible invoked theft law and disavowed consumer confusion. Reyes & Adler v.
28, 2022) Chanel sued What Goes Around Comes Around (WGACA), alleging trademark infringement, falseadvertising, false association/endorsement, and related NY GBL claims for deceptive/unfair trade practices and falseadvertising. Proximity of the products: A factfinder would have to decide the relevance of new v.
Courts have rejected Section 230 defenses against claims for falseadvertising, deceptive trade practices, and tortious interference. The amended opinion adds a brand new section independently dismissing the claim on its lack of merits. Vimeo appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. Google, Inc. ,
Plaintiffs alleged that these ads were false and misleading because there was no scientific evidence supporting the claim that GSG reduced the risk of developing certain allergies or atopic dermatitis. 2) A print magazine advertisement described GSG as the “1st Formula with FDA qualified health claim.” (3)
Nike claims that, despite those efforts, StockX sold a number of Nike-branded shoes that were counterfeits. As for the positivity of the ads, “consumer surveys in falseadvertising cases commonly display the challenged advertisement.” Cross-examination could address any deviation from market conditions.
At the core, plaintiff alleged that defendant MGDH’s use of phrasing and imagery suggesting that Meadow Gold brand products are sourced in Hawai’i was misleading and deceptive because Meadow Gold products contain milk and other products, such as whipping cream, imported from the continental United States. Hawai’I Jun. the origin.
Drug manufacturers still need an NDA or ANDA to sell their drugs, but, during the pendency of an open DESI proceeding, the FDA permits the subject product or drug to remain on the market. They are therefore allowed on the market during the DESI review pendency and qualify as pharmaceutically equivalent.
11, 2024) I have a long-running interest in Rule 68 offers of judgment, and this case involves an interaction with falseadvertising law! The parties compete in the shoe market. We are fiercely protective of the Crocs brand and our iconic DNA. Crocs, Inc., 2024 WL 1051951No. 23-cv-01790-PAB-KAS (D.
26, 2021) The parties compete to sell novelty consumer goods; defendant allegedly copied plaintiff’s business model including its product launches, providing its affiliates with Strong Current’s “marketing methods and materials, which include, among other things, product depictions and graphics.”
16, 2021) Previous ruling ; new judge still finds the falseadvertising claims sufficiently pled. Thus, Microsoft allegedly falselyadvertises its scanner as possessing a security capability that it does not actually possess; TocMail identified statements such as “a higher standard of security at lower cost than. [is
This court answers yes, though limits the effect of that by applying what looks like ordinary falseadvertising analysis. Through a licensing agreement, Hilti also markets and sells the Firestop Box Insert based in part on that same patent. And literally false statements presumptively cause competitors harm.”
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