Author Archives: rtushnet

"original" and "first" are mere puffery

Posted on June 18, 2014 by rtushnet

Bern Unlimited, Inc. v. Burton Corp., No. 11-12278, 2014 WL 2649006 (D. Mass. June 12, 2014) Bern sued six of its competitors in the market for sports helmets, alleging trade dress infringement.  Answering Bern’s third amended complaint, defendants asserted false … Continue reading →

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

Washington’s football team registrations cancelled

Posted on June 18, 2014 by rtushnet

If you didn’t get the link from five other places, here it is.  (It turns out that today was a bad day to wear shorts to the office; it’s not the best outfit for being interviewed by a suited TV … Continue reading →

Posted in trademark | Leave a comment

Grande deception?

Posted on June 18, 2014 by rtushnet

Starbucks and the “free” college education for its workers: The reporting on Starbucks’ offer has gone beyond the headline—and if treated like ordinary advertising, that headline is misleading.  As it turns out, Starbucks will only pay in full for two … Continue reading →

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

Fair use decisionmaking

Posted on June 18, 2014 by rtushnet

Deconstructing arguments that treat fair use as a mysterious and dangerous concept: This detailed analysis of a flowchart is quite useful. And it cites the OTW’s Fair Use Test Suite! 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: marijuana advertising and lessons from tobacco

Posted on June 17, 2014 by rtushnet

Kimber P. Richter, Ph.D., M.P.H. & Sharon Levy, M.D., M.P.H., Big Marijuana — Lessons from Big Tobacco, New England Journal of Medicine: [T]obacco was not always as lethal or addictive as it is today. In the 1880s, few people used … Continue reading →

Posted in advertising, reading list | Leave a comment

ALI CLE event on Lexmark, Pom, etc.

Posted on June 17, 2014 by rtushnet

First, I apologize for the slew of RSS feed updates you may recently have received if you subscribe via an RSS reader like Feedly—the feed has apparently been broken since early May. I was still here though!  If you’re interested, … Continue reading →

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

Such a lonely word: "honest" isn’t puffery

Posted on June 16, 2014 by rtushnet

Salazar v. Honest Tea, Inc., 2014 WL 2593601, No. 2:13-cv-02318 (E.D. Cal. June 10, 2014) Salazar alleged that HT’s Honey Green Tea bottles didn’t contain the amount of antioxidants represented on their labels, where independent lab testing determined that the … Continue reading →

Posted in california, consumer protection, fda, http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post, preemption | Leave a comment

infringement isn’t disparagement for advertising injury purposes

Posted on June 16, 2014 by rtushnet

Hartford Casualty Ins. Co. v. Swift Distribution, Inc., No. S207172, 2014 WL 2609753 (Cal. June 12, 2014) The California Supreme Court here provides a relatively rare state court interpretation of the scope of an advertising-related insurance policy.  Hartford insured Swift … Continue reading →

Posted in disparagement, insurance, trademark | Leave a comment

mortgages and the UCL: an occasional series

Posted on June 16, 2014 by rtushnet

Pestana v. Bank of America, 2014 WL 2616840, No. A137566 (Cal. Ct. App. June 12, 2014) Pestana sued his mortgage loan servicers (BoA) after BoA denied his application for a loan modification under the federal Home Affordable Mortgage Program (HAMP), … Continue reading →

Posted in california, consumer protection, unfairness | Leave a comment

A little more than kin: prominent house mark overcomes weak evidence of confusion

Posted on June 16, 2014 by rtushnet

KIND LLC v. Clif Bar & Co., 2014 WL 2619817, No. 14 Civ. 770 (S.D.N.Y. June 12, 2014) KIND sought a preliminary injunction against Clif Bar’s new trade dress for its MOJO bars; the court denied the motion.  KIND defines … Continue reading →

Posted in surveys, trademark | Leave a comment