Monthly Archives: April 2014

A couple of Google v. Garcia amicus briefs

Posted on April 17, 2014 by rtushnet

Int’l Documentary Ass’n brief, now with actual evidence on standard contracts! Makes a nice pair with Netflix’s brief, which cogently criticizes Kozinski’s entirely typical reliance on “facts” not in the record about what standard entertainment contracts are like. http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Posted in google, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

ordinary consumer goods jump on the lawsuit waiver bandwagon

Posted on April 17, 2014 by rtushnet

We all knew it was only a matter of time.  Apparently not sure that merely buying a product with a lawsuit waiver on the wrapper would work, GM now seeks to bind consumers who visit its website or “like” its … Continue reading →

Posted in advertising, contracts, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

The ASA on insufficiently close comparisons

Posted on April 16, 2014 by rtushnet

The ASA found Made.com’s ad misleading for claiming “FURNITURE DIRECT FROM THE MAKERS By the time the average sofa hits the high street it’s been marked up by 500%. Agents, importers and wholesalers all add a little extra along the … Continue reading →

Posted in advertising, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

FDA has a standard, so no Lanham Act claim can be made

Posted on April 15, 2014 by rtushnet

OraLabs, Inc. v. Kind Group LLC, 2014 WL 1395954, No. 13–cv–00170 (D. Colo. Apr. 10, 2014) The court adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny Kind leave to amend its counterclaims to add a Lanham Act false advertising claim. OraLabs … Continue reading →

Posted in fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, preemption | Leave a comment

conflict mineral disclosure unconstitutional, DC Circuit rules

Posted on April 15, 2014 by rtushnet

National Association of Manufacturers v. Securities and Exchange Commission, No. 13-5252 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 14, 2014) If we needed an example of how the First Amendment can reinstate Lochner, this would be a good one.  Here we have a regulation, … Continue reading →

Posted in commercial speech, first amendment, securities | Leave a comment

dig if you will the picture

Posted on April 14, 2014 by rtushnet

Bold Rock bottle in green Rolling Rock bottle Rolling Rock and Bold Rock.  Too bold? http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Posted in trademark | Leave a comment

Standard false advertising case doesn’t involve public benefit in Minn.

Posted on April 14, 2014 by rtushnet

Select Comfort Corp. v. Tempur Sealy International, Inc., No. 13–2451, 2014 WL 1379082 (D. Minn. Apr. 8, 2014) Select Comfort and Tempur Sealy compete to sell mattresses, with Select Comfort owning registered marks for Select Comfort and Sleep Number.  Defendant … Continue reading →

Posted in consumer protection, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

Phone resale not infringing even when reseller defaults

Posted on April 10, 2014 by rtushnet

T–Mobile USA, Inc. v. Chong, 2014 WL 1350896, No. C13–29 (W.D. Wash. Apr. 4, 2014) T-Mobile moved for the second time for default judgment; the court only granted it in part, though giving T-Mobile what it wanted in the form … Continue reading →

Posted in contracts, trademark | Leave a comment

Here to cheer on a mission from Garcia

Posted on April 9, 2014 by rtushnet

This story about a Raiderette’s lawsuit against the Raiders for violating employment law is interesting in itself, but an eagle-eyed correspondent points out that there is a very important word missing in the contract (attached to the complaint) post-Garcia.  Here … Continue reading →

Posted in http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post | Leave a comment

Uber alles except unfair competition

Posted on April 9, 2014 by rtushnet

I predict that Mark Lemley will not like this decision but that Mark McKenna will. Boston Cab Dispatch, Inc. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 2014 WL 1338148 No. 13–10769 (D. Mass. Mar. 27, 2014) Plaintiffs sued Uber for false advertising, unfair … Continue reading →

Posted in http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, trademark, unfairness | Leave a comment