Remove Brands Remove Confidentiality Remove False Advertising
article thumbnail

even after default, court may constrain recovery in competitive market

43(B)log

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 falsely advertised?

article thumbnail

SpicyIP Weekly Review (April 10- April 16)

SpicyIP

The court held that since it does not have the statistical data regarding market presence of other pharmaceutical compounds, the brand names that ends with “Dex” and when one removes from the cited examples the products containing dexamethasone and dextromethorphan, the remaining examples cannot make out a case u/s 17(2).

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

Google’s Search Disambiguation Doesn’t Create Initial Interest Confusion–Aliign v. lululemon

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

lululemon’s brand also displays prominently in its keyword ads. McNeil. * Three Keyword Advertising Decisions in a Week, and the Trademark Owners Lost Them All. * Competitor Gets Pyrrhic Victory in False Advertising Suit Over Search Ads–Harbor Breeze v. Labeled search results. Reyes & Adler v.

article thumbnail

Coach narrowly alleges grounds for cancellation of similar marks

43(B)log

and [the] Coach” brand. accused product another another The subsequent stipulation to a permanent injunction did not cover the registrations, but there is apparently a confidential settlement agreement that may have covered them. Chunma USA, Inc., 2021 WL 1534988, No. 20-CV-0271 (JMF) (S.D.N.Y.

article thumbnail

hashtags are plausibly infringing; sales claims plausibly false based on P's own history of sales

43(B)log

Purlife Brands, Inc., 21, 2023) In two opinions on the same day, the court dealt with various IP/false advertising claims brought by one litter box seller against another. Smarty Pear allegedly used confidential information to inject the market with a new—and virtually identical—automated litter box: the Leo’s Loo.

article thumbnail

Georgia Supreme Court Blesses Google’s Keyword Ad Sales–Edible IP v. Google

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

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. FTC. * New Jersey Attorney Ethics Opinion Blesses Competitive Keyword Advertising (…or Does It?). . * Duplicitous Competitive Keyword Advertising Lawsuits–Fareportal v.

IP 141
article thumbnail

Court Dismisses Trademark Claims Over Internal Search Results–Las Vegas Skydiving v. Groupon

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Las Vegas Skydiving Adventures offers tandem skydiving under the “Fyrosity” brand. Melwani sells products under the “Royal Silk” brand. FTC. * New Jersey Attorney Ethics Opinion Blesses Competitive Keyword Advertising (…or Does It?). . * Duplicitous Competitive Keyword Advertising Lawsuits–Fareportal v.

Trademark 110