Remove False Advertising Remove Law Remove Marketing
article thumbnail

False Patent Marking as False Advertising: Overcoming Dastar

Patently-O

Dawgs’ (“Dawgs”) counterclaim for false advertising under the Lanham Act. In 2016, Dawgs added new asserted counterclaims against Crocs, including a claim for false advertising under the Lanham Act. The briefs also discuss, to a limited extend, patent law’s false marking statute, 35 U.S.C. §

article thumbnail

ambiguity over who was first African-American bourbon distiller in Kentucky dooms false advertising claim

43(B)log

Brough Brothers alleged that Fresh Bourbon falsely advertised 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.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

game spat expands beyond false advertising to TM and (c)

43(B)log

Skillz sued its competitor Papaya, alleging false advertising 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.

article thumbnail

Announcing the Sixth Edition of Advertising & Marketing Law: Cases & Materials by Tushnet & Goldman

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

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: False Advertising Overview. Chapter 9: False Advertising Practice and Remedies. Price: $12.

Editing 126
article thumbnail

Griper’s Keyword Ads May Constitute False Advertising (Huh?)–LoanStreet v. Troia

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The court cites a mix of competitor lawsuits (which this is clearly not) and some antiquated 20+ year old griper precedent that are no longer credible law since the more modern approaches to gripers. How can Troia vie for a “market” when the court already said he “is not offering a good or service”???

article thumbnail

plaintiff has standing to seek injunctive relief against allegedly falsely advertised penile implant

43(B)log

Also, in “other cases, the threat of future harm may be the consumer’s plausible allegations that she might purchase the product in the future, despite the fact it was once marred by false advertising or labeling, as she may reasonably, but incorrectly, assume the product was improved.”

article thumbnail

Retailer has standing to assert Lanham Act false advertising claims against its own supplier

43(B)log

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 false advertising claim survived.