Tag Archives: false advertising

Meta’s AI assistance to advertisers defeats Section 230, court says

Posted on April 2, 2026 by rtushnet

Bouck v. Meta Platforms, Inc., No. 25-cv-05194-RS (N.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2026)  Does offering AI enhancements to deceptive ads constitute participating in what makes them illegal for purposes of avoiding section 230? This case answers “yes, relatively easily” and it … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

CA6 interprets literal falsity narrowly but says materiality implements the standing requirement, yay

Posted on April 1, 2026 by rtushnet

Victory Global, LLC v. Fresh Bourbon, LLC, — F.4th —-, 2026 WL 836221, No. 25-5173 (6th Cir. Mar. 26, 2026) Lower court decision discussed here. Victory Global, d/b/a Brough Brothers claims to have become the “first” African American-owned company to … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

Cal. anti-SLAPP law protects trailer for show that allegedly promised more fight than it delivered

Posted on April 1, 2026 by rtushnet

Camper v. Paramount Global, 2026 WL 836249, No. B339150 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 26, 2026) Camper “viewed a trailer for the reality television show College Hill: Celebrity Edition, which referenced, but did not show, a physical altercation between two cast … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

abortion clinic can proceed with false advertising claims against for-profit ad agency and (in part) the anti-abortion “center” it touted

Posted on April 1, 2026 by rtushnet

Four Women Health Servs., LLC v. Abundant Hope Pregnancy Resource Center, Inc., No. 1:24-cv-12283-JEK, 2026 WL 836424 (D. Mass. Mar. 26, 2026) Four Women is a licensed healthcare clinic that provides reproductive healthcare, including abortion care, to its patients. Abundant … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

challenge to whether certification agency did its job can’t be used to disprove an establishment claim

Posted on April 1, 2026 by rtushnet

McKeon Rolling Steel Door Co. v. U.S. Smoke & Fire Corp., 2026 WL 865699, 1:23-cv-8720 (ALC) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2026) McKeon sued defendants for false advertising under NY and federal law. I’m ignoring the trade secret counterclaim. McKeon and USS&F … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

court enjoins lawyer from using exaggerated/distorted animation of misfiring gun in advertising

Posted on March 31, 2026 by rtushnet

Sig Sauer, Inc. v. Jeffrey S. Bagnell, Esq., LLC, No. 3:22-cv-00885 (VAB), 2026 WL 867181 (D. Conn. Mar. 20, 2026) Bagnell, a lawyer, commissioned a graphics company to create an animation purporting to show how a P320 pistol could misfire … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Court enjoins T-Mobile’s “Save over $1000” campaign for comparing apples to oranges

Posted on March 31, 2026 by rtushnet

 Cellco Partnership v. T-Mobile USA Inc., 2026 WL 867129, No. 26-cv-0972 (LAK) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2026) Verizon sued T-Mobile for false advertising and the court granted a preliminary injunction, finding that T-Mobile’s claims that switchers could “Save Over $1,000” were … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

“shipping protection fee” providing no extra protection was plausibly misleading drip pricing

Posted on February 27, 2026 by rtushnet

DeMarco v. DNVB, Inc. (Thursday Boot Co.), No. 25-CV-3076 (GHW) (RFT), 2025 WL 4378637 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2025) (R&R) Thursday Boot sells shoes, apparel, handbags, and accessories on its website, which offers “free shipping and returns in the U. S.” … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Deadly automatic litterbox might be falsely advertised as “safe”

Posted on February 25, 2026 by rtushnet

Gomez v. PetPivot, Inc., 2026 WL 507708, No. 25-cv-5622 (LJL) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 24, 2026) “Safe” is the kind of word that is general enough that it might be puffery, but courts think that safety is important enough that they sometimes … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Amicus in support of cert in Lanham Act intent/damages case

Posted on February 24, 2026 by rtushnet

 Truth in Advertising, Barton Beebe, Mark Lemley, Alexandra Roberts and I just filed a brief arguing that the Supreme Court should clarify the role of intent in Lanham Act cases. from Blogger http://tushnet.blogspot.com/2026/02/amicus-in-support-of-cert-in-lanham-act.html

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment