-
Recent Posts
- Supplement guide was plausibly an agent of supplement company; direct and secondary liability available
- “GoodBelly” and “GoodHealth” plus label plausibly communicate net digestive health benefits
- Call for papers: Trademark and Unfair Competition Scholarship Roundtable 2023
- Today at noon EST: free HLS webinar on developing professionalism in students
- Panel on Jack Daniels argument at AU-WCL, March 22
Recent Comments
Archives
- 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
Tag Archives: defamation
robust TX anti-SLAPP law protects critic despite arguments that she was partly competing
ADB Interest, LLC v. Wallace, 606 S.W.3d 413 (Tex. Ct. App. 2020) This is an anti-SLAPP case about statements by a disgruntled customer/alleged competitor. Black, the managing member of ADB, invented the FasciaBlaster, which is marketed by ADB. The user … Continue reading
sunglasses reseller liable for (c) infringement, maybe TM/false advertising/tortious interference
Maui Jim, Inc. v. SmartBuy Guru Enters., No. 1:16 CV 9788, — F.Supp.3d —-, 2020 WL 4435320 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 24, 2020) Maui Jim alleged that the defendants sold non-genuine Maui-Jim-branded sunglasses while using its copyrighted photographs to falsely advertise … Continue reading
using picture of competitor’s product as reverse passing off
John Bean Tech. Corp. v. B GSE Gp., LLC, 2020 WL 4698984, No. 1:17-cv-142-RJS-DAO (D. Utah Aug. 13, 2020) Plaintiff JBT “is a major player in the aviation industry for ground support equipment,” used to maintain aircraft, including preconditioned air … Continue reading
false advertising claims against competing media nonprofit can continue under broad theory of commercial speech
Tang v. Guo, 2019 WL 6169940, No. 17 Civ. 9031 (JFK) (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 20, 2019) The previous complaint was dismissed for failure to sufficiently allege commercial speech; the court now finds it sufficiently alleged because the media defendant had a … Continue reading
law firm blog about somebody else’s case isn’t commercial speech
Wexler v. Dorsey & Whitney, LLP, — F.Supp.3d —-, 2019 WL 5485265, No. 18-CV-3066-SJB (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 25, 2019) Eric Goldman’s coverage. Wexler, a lawyer proceeding pro se, sued Dorsey (a law firm that does defendant-side Telephone & Consumer Protection Act … 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
C&D to competitor’s clients can be “commercial advertising & promotion”
Matonis v. Care Holdings Gp., L.L.C., No. 19-cv-20247-UU, 2019 WL 3386378 (S.D. Fla. Jul. 25, 2019) The defendant Care Companies engage in healthcare management consulting, “advising healthcare providers on, inter alia, patient intake strategies and revenue management.” Plaintiff Matonis is … Continue reading
Journal article merited better disclosure of affiliation w/competing group, not a lawsuit
Board of Forensic Document Examiners, Inc. v. American Bar Ass’n, — F.3d —-, 2019 WL 1930310, No. 18-2653 (7th Cir. May 1, 2019) The Board of Forensic Document Examiners is a non-profit organization that certifies forensic document examiners (currently about … Continue reading
Allegations of patent infringement could be defamatory but not false advertising
GeigTech East Bay LLC v. Lutron Electron. Co., 2019 WL 1768965, No. 18 Civ. 5290 (CM) (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 4, 2019) “What started as a garden-variety intellectual property dispute has morphed into something less conventional.” GeigTech initially sued Lutron, alleging that … Continue reading
Allegedly defamatory claims in e-recycling report weren’t commercial speech despite some economic incentive
Electronic Recycling Ass’n v. Basel Action Network, 2019 WL 1453575, No. C18-1601-MJP (W.D. Wash. Apr. 2, 2019) Plaintiff ERA is a Canadian non-profit corporation that specializes in recovering, refurbishing, and reusing discarded electronic equipment or “e-waste.” When it determines that … Continue reading