Global Brother SRI v. Altun, No. CV-25-00426-TUC-SHR, 2026
WL 1413605 (D. Ariz. May 20, 2026)

I don’t blog many false advertising default judgment
opinions; this one is different because it denies the motion. Global alleged
that it publishes books, including The Lost Book of Herbal Remedies and The
Lost Book of Herbal Remedies II. Altun allegedly, without authorization,
advertised and sold these books online, including through Amazon and other
marketplaces, labeling their condition as “new” and selling them at a
“significantly inflated” price, thereby misleading consumers to believe “the
listing reflects a premium authorized version or a limited official release.” Global
alleged false advertising in violation of the Lanham Act because they are
“likely to mislead a significant portion of consumers” and “resale of these
works without Plaintiff’s quality control, branding oversight, or packaging
integrity renders the products materially different.”

Factors for evaluating whether default judgment should be
entered include the merits of the substantive claims: a court must ask whether
the complaint stated a claim.

Global failed to show that using “new” to describe the books
was literally false. It pointed to no actual differences in defendant’s copies
or dissatisfied customers. Global’s lack of authorization or involvement in
resales, without more, wasn’t a violation of the Lanham Act.

from Blogger https://tushnet.blogspot.com/2026/05/unauthorized-sales-of-books-as-new-dont.html