Author Archives: rtushnet

Different meaning of Fizzkids and Wizkids defeats infringement claim even for similar products

Wizkids/NECA, LLC v. TIII Ventures, LLC, No. 17-CV-2400 (RA), 2019 WL 1454666 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2019) TIII sells “soda-can-themed toys, specifically, vinyl characters that are sold in packaging resembling a soda can.” The “Fizzkids” are called “Cranked Cola,” “Bone Crusher … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Allegedly defamatory claims in e-recycling report weren’t commercial speech despite some economic incentive

Electronic Recycling Ass’n v. Basel Action Network, 2019 WL 1453575, No. C18-1601-MJP (W.D. Wash. Apr. 2, 2019) Plaintiff ERA is a Canadian non-profit corporation that specializes in recovering, refurbishing, and reusing discarded electronic equipment or “e-waste.” When it determines that … Continue reading

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

Literal falsity about independence of tests/test results supports $18 million in disgorgement (incl. interest)

Dyson, Inc. v. SharkNinja Operating LLC, 2019 WL 1454509, No. 14 C 9442 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 31, 2019) Dyson sued SharkNinja in 2014 for false advertising.  SharkNinja won summary judgment except for Dyson’s literal falsity claim for the period from … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

burger case involves unclean hands (ew) and literal falsity about beef amounts

In-N-Out Burgers v. Smashburger IP Holder LLC, 2018 WL 7891028, No. SACV 17-1474 JVS(DFMx) (C.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2018) As relevant here, In-N-Out alleged that Smashburger falsely advertised its Triple Double hamburger as containing “Double the Beef” because the burger’s … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

statements about patent license status can violate Lanham Act’s false advertising provisions

Au New Haven, LLC v. YKK Corp., No. 15-cv-3411-GHW-SN, 2019 WL 1437516 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2019) Au holds the patent to a water-resistant zipper, and YKK had an exclusive “field of use” license that it allegedly exceeded, resulting in this … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Section 512 roundtable, open mic

Open mic Janis Pilch, Rutgers U: domestically it seems obvious that litigation on 512 can’t change the systemic problem of infringement and the impossibility for most rightsholders to litigate. 512 sets up a permanent conflict b/t service providers and rightsholders.  … Continue reading

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

Section 512 roundtable, part 4: International

SESSION 4: International Developments      Carlo Scollo Lavizzari International STM Association: (Scientific Technical Medical publishers, also arts & humanities publications.) Internet hasn’t been static. Dynamic developments in Europe from platform liability and safe harbor to one of responsibility, not just from … Continue reading

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