Author Archives: rtushnet

A rant on the Copyright Office’s Orphan Works proposal

And it’s not even from me!  As a dedicated ranter, however, I must recognize greatness in ranting when it appears.  Kyle Courtney, my hat’s off to you. http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

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

Reading list: Christine Jolls on visual disclosures

Christine Jolls, Debiasing Through Law and the First Amendment, 67 Stan. L. Rev. 1411 (2015): Law often compels the disclosure of information in particular—and, increasingly today, in visual—forms. Some judges conclude that such modern disclosure requirements break with the First … Continue reading →

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

Reading list: Christine Jolls on visual disclosures

Christine Jolls, Debiasing Through Law and the First Amendment, 67 Stan. L. Rev. 1411 (2015): Law often compels the disclosure of information in particular—and, increasingly today, in visual—forms. Some judges conclude that such modern disclosure requirements break with the First … Continue reading →

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

Exaggerated and outdated photos literally false, court rules

Spruce Environmental Technologies, Inc. v. Festa Radon Technologies, Co., 2015 WL 4038802, No. 15–11521 (D. Mass. July 2, 2015)   Spruce and Festa compete in the radon mitigation industry, selling products for testing and reducing indoor levels of the colorless … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Venable on notable NAD product name ruling

Amy Mudge and Randall Shaheen explain the NAD’s take on product names: if you put two terms together, as in “Nourishing Coconut Shampoo,” the ingredient has to provide the benefit.  If not, it has to be called “Nourishing Shampoo with … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Exaggerated and outdated photos literally false, court rules

Spruce Environmental Technologies, Inc. v. Festa Radon Technologies, Co., 2015 WL 4038802, No. 15–11521 (D. Mass. July 2, 2015)   Spruce and Festa compete in the radon mitigation industry, selling products for testing and reducing indoor levels of the colorless … Continue reading →

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

Venable on notable NAD product name ruling

Amy Mudge and Randall Shaheen explain the NAD’s take on product names: if you put two terms together, as in “Nourishing Coconut Shampoo,” the ingredient has to provide the benefit.  If not, it has to be called “Nourishing Shampoo with … Continue reading →

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

Clearblue’s pregnancy test gets the blues: recall ordered for false advertising

Church & Dwight Co. v. SPD Swiss Precision Diagnostics, GMBH, 2015 WL 4002468, No. 14–CV–585 (S.D.N.Y. July 1, 2015)   A good old-fashioned false advertising case about pregnancy tests!  Prior opinion, refusing to dismiss the claims as preempted in light … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Clearblue’s pregnancy test gets the blues: recall ordered for false advertising

Church & Dwight Co. v. SPD Swiss Precision Diagnostics, GMBH, 2015 WL 4002468, No. 14–CV–585 (S.D.N.Y. July 1, 2015)   A good old-fashioned false advertising case about pregnancy tests!  Prior opinion, refusing to dismiss the claims as preempted in light … Continue reading →

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

UK ad regulator disapproves of negative puffery

One big difference between the US and the EU in comparative advertising is that what we would consider negative puffery, like “overpriced,” the EU bans as not sufficiently objective.  In this ASA adjudication, the advertiser both ran a review site … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment