-
Recent Posts
- WIPIP Panel 6: Design and Brand; Protectable Subject Matter; Copyright Theory and Doctrine II
- WIPIP Panel 5: Trademark Doctrine
- WIPIP Panel 4: Emerging Technologies
- “shipping protection fee” providing no extra protection was plausibly misleading drip pricing
- WIPIP Panel 3: Deepfakes, Celebrities, and Movies
Recent Comments
Archives
- February 2026
- January 2026
- December 2025
- November 2025
- October 2025
- September 2025
- August 2025
- July 2025
- June 2025
- May 2025
- April 2025
- March 2025
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- June 2013
Categories
- 230
- acpa
- advertising
- antitrust
- art law
- attribution
- blogging
- california
- cfaa
- cfps
- class actions
- cmi
- comics
- commercial speech
- conferences
- consumer protection
- contracts
- copying
- copyright
- counterfeiting
- cultural property
- damages
- dastar
- defamation
- design patent
- dilution
- disclosures
- disparagement
- dmca
- drm
- fan fiction
- fanworks
- fda
- fees
- first amendment
- ftc
- geographic indications
- http://schemas.google.com/blogger/2008/kind#post
- insurance
- jurisdiction
- libraries
- misappropriation
- music
- my lawsuits
- my writings
- parody
- patent
- patents
- preemption
- presentations
- privacy
- procedure
- reading list
- remedies
- right of publicity
- secondary liability
- securities
- standing
- surveys
- teaching
- tortious interference
- trade secrets
- trademark
- traditional knowledge
- Uncategorized
- unconscionability
- unfairness
- warranties
Meta
Category Archives: advertising
NYT on finessing FDA label requirements
Oreo’s “Cookie Dough” Oreo has neither chocolate chips nor cookie dough. “Compliance” with FDA labeling requirements is achieved (says Oreo) by the use of “flavor creme” in smaller type on the packaging, plus “chocolatey” chips since the chips don’t meet … Continue reading
Posted in advertising, fda
Leave a comment
state can regulate health referral provider’s speech about potential benefits
1-800-411-Pain Referral Service, LLC v. Otto, 2014 WL 904190, No. 13-1167, — F.3d —- (8th Cir. Mar. 10, 2014) My discussion of the opinion below. 411-Pain advertises extensively and connects callers to health care providers or attorneys in their areas. … Continue reading
Securities law and advertising law
Ann Lipton (Duke) has a post up on the import of Halliburton II, a securities case about the fraud on the market doctrine, with at least potential relevance to advertising law. Another of her posts considers the securities law … Continue reading
Slate on the branding of spelling (or the spelling of branding)
Marketers address unusual and downright awful grammar and spelling choices in brand names. Strange spelling may sometimes help memorability, a desired brand feature, but the law ignores bad spelling. http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss
Posted in advertising, trademark
Leave a comment
Credit score service is credit repair service because of its ads
Stout v. FreeScore, LLC, No. 10-56887 (9th Cir. Feb. 21, 2014) The court of appeals reversed the dismissal of Stout’s putative class action against FreeScore under the Credit Repair Organizations Act (CROA). The district court concluded that FreeScore is not … Continue reading
Posted in advertising, consumer protection
Leave a comment
Strict liability for misleading advertising in Europe
Interesting post from Lewis Silkin about the UK’s ASA versus the EU Court of Justice: the former allowed an advertiser to rely on a third party’s representations (I think that’s a bit of a simplification–the third party was the complainant … Continue reading
Product placement labeled news attracts NAD’s condemnation
American Media, Inc. (Shape Water Boosters), NAD Case #5665 (Dec. 18, 2013) NAD brought this case itself. NYT article on the case, of note given the NYT’s own foray into “native advertising.” An article in Shape magazine, and on its … Continue reading
advertising law exam in 140 characters or less
Film critic’s tweet turned into ad without his consent: violation of the right of publicity? Grounds for a false endorsement claim? Or just standard practice for publishers’/studios’ use of reviews? (This ad is for a product itself protected by the … Continue reading
Posted in advertising, right of publicity
Leave a comment
News for storage jars containing sugar
The NYT discusses searches for new sugar substitutes, along with legal/advertising aspects of their promotion: [W]hat about the consumers who are drawn to “natural” claims — will they still go for stevia when it flows from a vat of G.M.O.’s? … Continue reading
Posted in advertising, consumer protection
Leave a comment
Irrationally sexist advertising
PETA notoriously has a lot of ad campaigns focusing on women’s bodies and sexuality. Two recent studies suggest that this backfires: dehumanizing women reduces intentions to support the organization. It’s a mantra that half of all advertising dollars are wasted–but … Continue reading
Posted in advertising
Leave a comment