Author Archives: rtushnet

Reading list: disclosures as compelled commercial speech

Reading list: Aaron Stenz, Note: The Controversial Demise of Zauderer: Revitalizing Zauderer Post-NIFLA, 104 Minn. L. Rev. 553 (2019). The First Amendment broadly stands for the idea that government attempts to curtail the right of the American people to both … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Malwarebytes: same result, new puzzles on remand for 230 immunity

Enigma Software Group USA, LLC v. Malwarebytes, Inc., — F.3d —-, 2019 WL 7373959, No. 17-17351 (9th Cir. Dec. 31, 2019) New opinion, same result; no rehearing en banc. Because the parties are competitors, §230 does not provide Malwarebytes with … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

another timeshare exit company can be sued under state law, but not Lanham Act

Orange Lake Country Club, Inc. v. Reed Hein & Assoc., LLC, 2019 WL 7423517, No: 6:17-cv-1542-Orl-78DCI (M.D. Fla. Oct. 4, 2019) Another timeshare case, this one kicking out Lanham Act claims but not FDUTPA deceptive practices claims on proximate cause. … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

“most experienced” is puffery, but misrepresenting degree of responsibility for projects could be false

Cypress Advisors, Inc. v. Davis, 2019 WL 7290948, No. 17-cv-01219-MSK-KLM (D. Colo. Aug. 28, 2019) Cypress provides financial advice to clients in the franchise restaurant industry. Defendant Kent Davis used to work there, but he left and started a competing … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

“diet” isn’t misleading for soda even if surveys say it is

Becerra v. Dr Pepper/Seven Up, Inc., 2019 WL 7287554, No. 18-16721 (9th Cir. Dec. 30, 2019) Becerra alleged that Dr Pepper violated the usual California consumer-fraud laws by branding Diet Dr Pepper using the word “diet.” She cited dictionary definitions … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Competitor’s Google review accusing P of “scam” was nondefamatory opinion

Creditors Relief LLC v. United Debt Settlement LLC, 2019 WL 7288978, No. 17-7474 (D.N.J. Dec. 30, 2019) Plaintiff CR is a New Jersey-based debt settlement company that has allegedly “received significant publicity and an A+ rating from the Better Business … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Amicus brief in 4th Circuit Lanham Act case on the meaning of literal falsity

Brian Wolfman filed this amicus, which I drafted, on behalf of a number of Lanham Act professors. It involves a false advertising case with a number of moving parts; the amicus addresses only the court’s opportunity to correct the mistaken … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment