Author Archives: rtushnet

Consumers can’t bring the claim that Pom could against Minute Maid

Posted on August 21, 2015 by rtushnet

Stansfield v. Minute Maid Co., 2015 WL 4873685, No. 4:14cv290 (N.D. Fla. Aug. 13, 2015)   The court kicked out consumer protection claims based on the same falsity alleged in Pom Wonderful v. Coca-Cola, on the ground that they were … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Court finds misleading omissions can deprive ISP of 230 protection

Posted on August 21, 2015 by rtushnet

General Steel Domestic Sales, LLC v. Chumley, No. 14-cv-01932, 2015 WL 4911585 (D. Colo. Aug. 18, 2015)   General Steel sued Chumley and Atlantic Building, of which he was CEO, for false advertising, libel, and intentional interference with prospective business … Continue reading →

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

Copyright infringement is channeled into (c), not state or Lanham Act claims

Posted on August 19, 2015 by rtushnet

Quadratec, Inc. v. Turn 5, Inc., 2015 WL 4876314, No. 13–6384 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 13, 2015)   The parties compete to sell removable soft tops and other aftermarket parts and accessories for Jeep vehicles. Quadratec alleged that it invests substantial … Continue reading →

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

Connecticut taxi companies’ claims against Uber fail

Posted on August 18, 2015 by rtushnet

Greenwich Taxi, Inc. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 2015 WL 4774989, No. 14cv733 (D. Conn. Aug. 13, 2015   Plaintiffs sued Uber for violating the Lanham Act, the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA), and RICO, as well as for intentional … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

No winner in Cablevision v. Verizon

Posted on August 17, 2015 by rtushnet

Cablevision Systems Corp. v. Verizon New York Inc., — F.Supp.3d —-, 2015 WL 4758072, No. 15–CV–456 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 7, 2015) (magistrate judge)   Cablevision and Verizon sought to enjoin each other’s comparative ads; the court denied both cross-motions for preliminary … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

Reading list: Kate Crawford and Tarleton Gillespie

Posted on August 14, 2015 by rtushnet

Rebecca Tushnet, What is a Theorist For? The Recruitment of Users into Online Governance, JOTWELL (August 14, 2015) (reviewing Kate Crawford & Tarleton Gillespie, What is a flag for? Social media reporting tools and the vocabulary of complaint, New Media … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Reading list: Kate Crawford and Tarleton Gillespie

Posted on August 14, 2015 by rtushnet

Rebecca Tushnet, What is a Theorist For? The Recruitment of Users into Online Governance, JOTWELL (August 14, 2015) (reviewing Kate Crawford & Tarleton Gillespie, What is a flag for? Social media reporting tools and the vocabulary of complaint, New Media … Continue reading →

Posted in my writings, reading list | Leave a comment

Pure mourning: Pom fails to get preliminary injunction again

Posted on August 12, 2015 by rtushnet

Pom Wonderful LLC v.  Pur Beverages LLC, No. 13-cv-06917 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 6, 2015)    Pom fares no better its second time around. Although the court of appeals previously found likely confusion between its marks and defendant’s “pūr pŏm” energy … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

11th Circuit recognizes contributory false advertising theory

Posted on August 12, 2015 by rtushnet

Duty Free Americas, Inc. v. Estee Lauder Companies, Inc., — F.3d —- (2015), 2015 WL 4709573, No. 14–11853 (11th Cir. Aug. 7, 2015)   Plaintiff DFA operates duty free stores in many international airports nationwide.  It sued Estée Lauder, arguing … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Pure mourning: Pom fails to get preliminary injunction again

Posted on August 12, 2015 by rtushnet

Pom Wonderful LLC v.  Pur Beverages LLC, No. 13-cv-06917 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 6, 2015)    Pom fares no better its second time around. Although the court of appeals previously found likely confusion between its marks and defendant’s “pūr pŏm” energy … Continue reading →

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