Author Archives: rtushnet

IPSC part 1

Posted on August 7, 2014 by rtushnet

Opening notes: usual disclaimers apply. Given the size and scope of the conference, I couldn’t attend half of what interested me. (I wish more people would send in their papers so I could read them!)  My notes aren’t guaranteed to … Continue reading →

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

bait and switch as both false advertising and trademark infringement

Posted on August 6, 2014 by rtushnet

ADT LLC v. Vision Security, LLC, 2014 WL 3764152, No. 13–8119 (S.D. Fla. July 30, 2014) ADT competes with Security Networks to sell alarm systems.  Vision Security is an agent of Security Networks; it doesn’t manufacture alarm systems, but instead … Continue reading →

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

Use of mark on product isn’t "ad" for insurance purposes

Posted on August 6, 2014 by rtushnet

Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co. v. Willowood USA, LLC, No. 6:13–cv–01923, 2014 WL 3797673 (D. Or. Aug. 1, 2014) Willowood was sued for trademark infringement and related causes of action by a former licensor, and sought insurance coverage.  The … Continue reading →

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

John Oliver on native advertising

Posted on August 5, 2014 by rtushnet

John Oliver covers topics relevant to advertising law again in this piece on native advertising and the fact that it only works by tricking people. http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Posted in advertising, commercial speech | Leave a comment

Prevailing copyright defendant acts as private AG, deserves fees

Posted on August 5, 2014 by rtushnet

Klinger v. Conan Doyle Estate, Ltd., No. 14-1128 (7th Cir. Aug. 4, 2014) Judge Posner throws his usual rhetorical bombs around, this time to the delight of copyright restrictionists.  In Klinger v. Conan Doyle Estate, Ltd., 2014 WL 2726187 (7th … Continue reading →

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

COOL story, part 3: dissents

Posted on July 31, 2014 by rtushnet

Judge Henderson dissented, believing the question of Zauderer’s appropriate scope to have been resolved in R.J. Reynolds and unfairly revisited. Judge Brown also dissented, quite vigorously. Under the majority’s reasoning, “a business owner no longer has a constitutionally protected right … Continue reading →

Posted in commercial speech, disclosures, first amendment | Leave a comment

COOL story, part 2: concurrences

Posted on July 31, 2014 by rtushnet

AMI continued: concurrences Judge Rogers concurred in part.  She wrote to disassociate herself from the suggested collapse of Central Hudsonand Zauderer.  “Viewing Zaudereras simply an application of Central Hudson to special circumstances … finds support in neither Supreme Court precedent … Continue reading →

Posted in commercial speech, first amendment | Leave a comment

COOL story, part 1: DC Circuit upholds country of origin labeling rule

Posted on July 31, 2014 by rtushnet

American Meat Institute v. U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture, No. 13-5281 (D.C. Cir. July 29, 2014) The D.C. Circuit here, en banc, upholds country of origin labeling (COOL) requirements for meat, and in the process holds that Zauderer’s standard for compelled … Continue reading →

Posted in commercial speech, disclosures, first amendment | Leave a comment

Second Circuit reiterates presumptions of harm, damages in literal falsity case

Posted on July 31, 2014 by rtushnet

Merck Eprova AG v. Gnosis S.p.A., No. 12‐4218 (2d Cir. July 29, 2014)  Merck won a false advertising case against Gnosis, and the court awarded it over $500,000 in damages, over $2 million in attorneys’ fees and costs, and prejudgment … Continue reading →

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

false advertising about design in the absence of secondary meaning?

Posted on July 31, 2014 by rtushnet

Brian Lichtenberg, LLC v. Alex & Chloe, Inc., No. CV 13–06837, 2014 WL 3698317 (C.D. Cal. July 25, 2014) Brian Lichtenberg (Brian) designs clothing and accessories, including parodies of designer brands, such as “Homiès” as a play on “Hermès” and … Continue reading →

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