Category Archives: Uncategorized

advertiser can amend complaint against Facebook for click fraud claims

DotStrategy Co. v. Facebook Inc., No. C 20-00170 WHA, 2020 WL 6591366 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 11, 2020) The court grants plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend its complaint in this putative class action alleging that FB’s statements about advertising on … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

timeshare exit lawyer wins a round: no harm causation shown

Club Exploria, LLC v. Aaronson, Austin, P.A., No. 18-cv-576-Orl-28DCI, 2020 WL 6585802 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 10, 2020) Another timeshare v. timeshare exit lawyer case that goes much better for the defendant than some others. Briefly, the plaintiff seems to have … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Peloton’s music troubles give it consumer protection troubles over “ever-growing library” claim

Fishon v. Peloton Interactive, Inc., 2020 WL 6564755, No. 19-cv-11711 (LJL) (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 9, 2020) Peloton streams live and on-demand fitness classes requiring a monthly subscription fee. Certain Peloton ads described the library of fitness classes as “ever-growing.” But in … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

misbehavior in Amazon reviews + false ingredient claims = $9.5 million award

Vitamins Online, Inc. v. HeartWise, Inc. 2020 WL 6581050, No. 13-cv-00982-DAK (D. Utah Nov. 10, 2020) This is a long-running supplement false advertising case involving both ingredient and “review” claims; here the district court resolves a number of issues, finding … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Amicus brief in Stouffer v. Nat’l Geographic (a title v title infringement case)

With Mark Lemley, Mark McKenna, and a number of other IP professors, I submitted this amicus brief arguing that the 10th Circuit should adopt Rogers v. Grimaldi (without any exclusion for title v title claims) for assessing trademark claims against … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

230 defense fails where speaker’s ownership/control of D is sufficiently alleged

Tang v. Guo, 2020 WL 6414371, No. 17 Civ. 9031 (JFK) (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 2, 2020) Further on this case about a dispute between a political activist and a rival. Plaintiffs sued defendants including Guo a/k/a Kwok and four entities that … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

press release in supplement battle could be false advertising

ThermoLife Int’l LLC v. NeoGenis Labs Inc., 2020 WL 6395442, No. CV-18-02980-PHX-DWL (D. Ariz. Nov. 2, 2020) Plaintiff/counterdefendant ThermoLife and defendant/counterplaintiff HumanN both hold patents related to the use of nitrate technology for supplements. ThermoLife alleged that HumanN engaged in … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

solar flareup: Panasonic and Tesla successor in interest in false advertising battle

I know you want to read about a false advertising dispute that, for once, tries to work around the restrictions of trademark law and not the other way around! Kinect Solar, LLC v. Panasonic Corp., No. 1:20-CV-378-LY, 2020 WL 6385292 … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Trade dress question of the day, butterbeer–I mean butterscotch beer–edition

 Found this product, Flying Cauldron butterscotch cream soda: Harry Potter fans (or former fans), what say you? from Blogger https://ift.tt/3jD47ik

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

trademark law continues as 500 pound gorilla in glue case

J-B Weld Company, LLC v. Gorilla Glue Co., — F.3d —-, 2020 WL 6144561, No. 18-14975 (11th Cir. Oct. 20, 2020) This case illustrates how much leeway trademark claims often get and how little false advertising claims do. My daughter … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment