-
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: Uncategorized
“studies prove” as puffery?
Sorry for the photo quality, but I was quite struck by the claim: “Studies Prove That Live Shows Add Years to Your Life. Who Are We to Argue with Science?” Query whether reasonable consumers would receive a “tests prove” message. … Continue reading
pharmaco gets summary judgment against compounder on falsity/unlawfulness
Allergan USA, Inc. v. Imprimis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 2019 WL 4545960, No. 17-cv-01551-DOC-JDE (C.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2019) The parties compete in the market for ophthalmic drugs. Imprimis sells its ophthalmic drugs pursuant to Sections 503A and 503B of the FDCA … Continue reading
scientific debates can ordinarily be resolved in false advertising cases
Pax Water Technologies, Inc. v. Medora Corp., 2019 WL 4390567, No. LA CV18-09143 JAK (AGRx) (C.D. Cal. Aug. 5, 2019) The parties compete in the market for water treatment technologies for municipalities, public water agencies and districts, and private parties. … Continue reading
“Hawaiian” plus imagery isn’t deceptive indication of origin (or is it?)
Maeda v. Kennedy Endeavors, Inc., No. 18-00459 JAO-WRP, 2019 WL 4544272 (D. Hawai’i Sept. 19, 2019) Kennedy sells “Hawaiian” brand snacks; plaintiffs alleged that the name and packaging misled them into thinking that the snacks were made in Hawai’i from … Continue reading
Southern Poverty Law Center’s “hate group” designation isn’t false advertising, false association
Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 17cv566-MHT, 2019 WL 4547064 (M.D. Ala. Sept. 19, 2019) Coral Ridge sued the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Amazon.com, and the AmazonSmile Foundation. It alleged that, “because of its religious opposition … Continue reading
coconut milk could mislead by claiming “no cholesterol” where it’s too high fat for that label
Marshall v. Danone US, Inc., No. 19-cv-01332-RS, 2019 WL 4509045, — F. Supp. 3d — (N.D. Cal. Sept. 13, 2019) Marshall brought a putative class action alleging false advertising (the usual California claims) against Silk coconut milk, which on its … Continue reading
outdated website uses preserve TM infringement claim; false use of (R) doesn’t matter if it doesn’t cause harm
Max Rack, Inc. v. Core Health & Fitness, LLC, 2019 WL 4451698, No. 16-cv-01015 (S.D. Ohio Sept. 17, 2019) Sloppy website maintenance likely denies defendant what otherwise would have been summary judgment victory on its ex-partner/now-competitor’s trademark infringement claims; meanwhile, … Continue reading
calling NBC’s lawyers: gold company can claim #1 rank by Today Show, can’t make additional misrepresentations
Express Gold Cash, Inc. v. Beyond 79, LLC, 2019 WL 4394567, No. 18-cv-00837 EAW (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 13, 2019) The parties are two of the top competitors in the market for nationwide mail-in precious metals purchases. When a customer mails in … Continue reading