Remove Brands Remove False Advertising Remove Trademark Law
article thumbnail

dissatisfaction w/Amazon's partner program isn't TM infringement/false advertising

43(B)log

7, 2022) Melwani owns the Royal Silk trademark for “a wide variety of products.” His marks are enrolled in Amazon Brand Registry, and Royal Silk Direct maintains an authorized Royal Silk “storefront” on Amazon.com. False designation of origin/false advertising: Lasoff v. Amazon.com, Inc., 2022 WL 670919, NO.

article thumbnail

Even in default, it's not TM infringement to resell legitimate goods (but maybe false advertising to call them new)

43(B)log

Quincy sued BRYK “under multiple legal theories for making unauthorized sales of products branded with Quincy’s PREVAGEN trademark.” But the unauthorized sale of a genuine product does not violate trademark law. Even after default.

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

Unreasoned Orders for Personality Rights

IP and Legal Filings

Using the name or image of a celebrity for brand advertisement or promotion in the US does not always attract liability, provided the brand is not falsely misleading the public that the celebrity endorses the product. Spelling-Goldberg Prods., In Gautam Gambhir v. D.A.P & Co. &

article thumbnail

Top Trademark Trends of 2022

Erik K Pelton

Besides Mariah, there were many other celebrity trademark stories this year, as more an more celebrities launch more and more brands. On November 7 th , Conde Nast sued Drake and 21 Savage for $4 million for false advertising and infringing Vogue’s trademarks. Past issues of Top Trademark Trends: 2021: [link].

Trademark 130
article thumbnail

rebinding books doesn't create derivative works but may be actionable under Lanham Act

43(B)log

False advertising: Spiralverse allegedly falsely advertised its version of the Piano Book on Amazon as “new,” despite the rebinding, residue, and front labels. Was this literally false?

article thumbnail

IPSC Breakout 3: Trademark and Unfair Competition

43(B)log

Mary Catherine Amerine, Reasonably Careless Consumers in False Advertising and Trademark Consumers can devote much more (or less) time to a decision than seems rational for the amount of risk/benefit in their lives. Court expects consumers to be reasonably prudent in both TM and false advertising.

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.