Remove Branding Remove False Advertising Remove Television
article thumbnail

California Supreme Court reaffirms strict liability for false advertising in Serova

43(B)log

The First Amendment has long coexisted with no-fault false advertising laws. So, were Sony’s statements, “a brand new album from the greatest artist of all time” with “9 previously unreleased vocal tracks performed by Michael Jackson,” commercial speech? There was also no copyright preemption. City of Los Angeles, 697 F.3d

article thumbnail

Atari’s Copyright Claim Against State Farm Survives Challenge

Copyright Lately

In addition to copyright infringement, Atari brought claims for business disparagement, false information and advertising, unfair competition, and unjust enrichment. Effect on the market : Atari alleged that it has an active licensing business extending its brand into advertising, merchandising, and other areas.

Fair Use 113
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

"Australia's #1" is puffery for product sourced from but not sold in Australia

43(B)log

Painaway advertised its products as “Australia’s No. 1 Joint & Muscle Spray and Cream Topical Pain Relief Brand” on: (1) its Australian website; (2) social media; and (3) Ultimate Fighting Championship (“UFC”) athletes’ clothing in matches televised in the United States.

article thumbnail

Models' false endorsement claims fail for want of recognition, bad survey

43(B)log

Plaintiffs sued for false advertising and false endorsement under the Lanham Act, violation of their right to publicity, deceptive trade practices under New York GBL Section 349, and defamation. 2021), which considered all these claims except for false advertising. The court was guided by Electra v. 3d 233 (2d Cir.

article thumbnail

Second Circuit signals some minimal flexibility on Polaroid analysis in another strip club false endorsement case

43(B)log

May 19, 2023) Whereas the timeshare false advertising 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.

article thumbnail

False endorsement remains broader than many state ROP laws

43(B)log

American Girl Brands, LLC, 2021 WL 510729, No. Yes: They plausibly pled “a commercial interest in giving scientific presentations, appearing on scientific television shows, and participating in science-related events.” Walkowicz v. 20-cv-374-jdp (W.D.

Law 59
article thumbnail

9th Circuit orders district court to reconsider statutory damages award to NY class under NY law

43(B)log

Premier sold Joint Juice for treating/preventing joint pain; a jury found it liable to a consumer class for false advertising under NY law; and the district court awarded statutory damages to the class, but cut them by over 90%. When Premier considered running its own study, its president wrote: “if poor—don’t publish.”

Law 59