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
McNeil. * Three Keyword Advertising Decisions in a Week, and the Trademark Owners Lost Them All. * Competitor Gets Pyrrhic Victory in FalseAdvertising Suit Over Search Ads–Harbor Breeze v. 1-800 Contacts. * FTC Explains Why It Thinks 1-800 Contacts’ Keyword Ad Settlements Were Anti-Competitive–FTC v.
McNeil. * Three Keyword Advertising Decisions in a Week, and the Trademark Owners Lost Them All. * Competitor Gets Pyrrhic Victory in FalseAdvertising Suit Over Search Ads–Harbor Breeze v. 1-800 Contacts. * FTC Explains Why It Thinks 1-800 Contacts’ Keyword Ad Settlements Were Anti-Competitive–FTC v.
.” In other words, they sought to establish (using centuries-old chattel-based theft doctrines rather than trademarklaw) that a trademark owner has the unrestricted right to shut down anyone using their trademarks, even if no consumers are harmed. to see if it could find some soft spot in Georgia state law.
More Posts About Keyword Advertising. Griper’s Keyword Ads May Constitute FalseAdvertising (Huh?)–LoanStreet Troia. * Trademark Owner F s Around With Keyword Ad Case & Finds Out–Las Vegas Skydiving v. 1-800 Contacts. * FTC Explains Why It Thinks 1-800 Contacts’ Keyword Ad Settlements Were Anti-Competitive–FTC v.
Brown Engstrand * More on Law Firms and Competitive Keyword Ads–Nicolet Law v. Bye, Goff * Yet More Evidence That Keyword Advertising Lawsuits Are Stupid–Porta-Fab v. Allied Modular * Griper’s Keyword Ads May Constitute FalseAdvertising (Huh?)–LoanStreet LoanStreet v. Reyes & Adler v.
May 10, 2023) More Posts About Keyword Advertising * Yet More Evidence That Keyword Advertising Lawsuits Are Stupid–Porta-Fab v. Allied Modular * Griper’s Keyword Ads May Constitute FalseAdvertising (Huh?)–LoanStreet Troia * Trademark Owner F s Around With Keyword Ad Case & Finds Out–Las Vegas Skydiving v.
While this is a startling good defense ruling from a trademarklaw standpoint, I could see a state bar arguing that ads violate ethics rules if they produce hundreds of potentially misdirected prospective clients. May 18, 2023) More Posts About Keyword Advertising * More on Law Firms and Competitive Keyword Ads–Nicolet Law v.
McNeil. * Three Keyword Advertising Decisions in a Week, and the Trademark Owners Lost Them All. * Competitor Gets Pyrrhic Victory in FalseAdvertising Suit Over Search Ads–Harbor Breeze v. 1-800 Contacts. * FTC Explains Why It Thinks 1-800 Contacts’ Keyword Ad Settlements Were Anti-Competitive–FTC v.
McNeil. * Three Keyword Advertising Decisions in a Week, and the Trademark Owners Lost Them All. * Competitor Gets Pyrrhic Victory in FalseAdvertising Suit Over Search Ads–Harbor Breeze v. 1-800 Contacts. * FTC Explains Why It Thinks 1-800 Contacts’ Keyword Ad Settlements Were Anti-Competitive–FTC v.
McNeil. * Three Keyword Advertising Decisions in a Week, and the Trademark Owners Lost Them All. * Competitor Gets Pyrrhic Victory in FalseAdvertising Suit Over Search Ads–Harbor Breeze v. 1-800 Contacts. * FTC Explains Why It Thinks 1-800 Contacts’ Keyword Ad Settlements Were Anti-Competitive–FTC v.
Brown Engstrand * More on Law Firms and Competitive Keyword Ads–Nicolet Law v. Bye, Goff * Yet More Evidence That Keyword Advertising Lawsuits Are Stupid–Porta-Fab v. Allied Modular * Griper’s Keyword Ads May Constitute FalseAdvertising (Huh?)–LoanStreet LoanStreet v. Reyes & Adler v.
Brown Engstrand * More on Law Firms and Competitive Keyword Ads–Nicolet Law v. Bye, Goff * Yet More Evidence That Keyword Advertising Lawsuits Are Stupid–Porta-Fab v. Allied Modular * Griper’s Keyword Ads May Constitute FalseAdvertising (Huh?)–LoanStreet LoanStreet v. Reyes & Adler v.
McNeil. * Three Keyword Advertising Decisions in a Week, and the Trademark Owners Lost Them All. * Competitor Gets Pyrrhic Victory in FalseAdvertising Suit Over Search Ads–Harbor Breeze v. 1-800 Contacts. * FTC Explains Why It Thinks 1-800 Contacts’ Keyword Ad Settlements Were Anti-Competitive–FTC v.
Brown Engstrand * More on Law Firms and Competitive Keyword Ads–Nicolet Law v. Bye, Goff * Yet More Evidence That Keyword Advertising Lawsuits Are Stupid–Porta-Fab v. Allied Modular * Griper’s Keyword Ads May Constitute FalseAdvertising (Huh?)–LoanStreet LoanStreet v. Reyes & Adler v.
Brown Engstrand * More on Law Firms and Competitive Keyword Ads–Nicolet Law v. Bye, Goff * Yet More Evidence That Keyword Advertising Lawsuits Are Stupid–Porta-Fab v. Allied Modular * Griper’s Keyword Ads May Constitute FalseAdvertising (Huh?)–LoanStreet LoanStreet v. Reyes & Adler v.
Brown Engstrand * More on Law Firms and Competitive Keyword Ads–Nicolet Law v. Bye, Goff * Yet More Evidence That Keyword Advertising Lawsuits Are Stupid–Porta-Fab v. Allied Modular * Griper’s Keyword Ads May Constitute FalseAdvertising (Huh?)–LoanStreet LoanStreet v. Reyes & Adler v.
McNeil. * Three Keyword Advertising Decisions in a Week, and the Trademark Owners Lost Them All. * Competitor Gets Pyrrhic Victory in FalseAdvertising Suit Over Search Ads–Harbor Breeze v. 1-800 Contacts. * FTC Explains Why It Thinks 1-800 Contacts’ Keyword Ad Settlements Were Anti-Competitive–FTC v.
So much time and money was wasted on the trademark battles over keyword ad sales back in the old days, and it would break my heart if we do all of that over again. Competitive keyword advertising by lawyers is different from most other industry segments, because lawyers must also comply with their ethics rules in addition to trademarklaw.
McNeil. * Three Keyword Advertising Decisions in a Week, and the Trademark Owners Lost Them All. * Competitor Gets Pyrrhic Victory in FalseAdvertising Suit Over Search Ads–Harbor Breeze v. 1-800 Contacts. * FTC Explains Why It Thinks 1-800 Contacts’ Keyword Ad Settlements Were Anti-Competitive–FTC v.
For about a decade, courts had realized that IIC had gone way too far, and had expanded liability in ways that didn’t protect consumers and facilitated anticompetitive claims about falseadvertising.
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