Tag Archives: false advertising

False establishment claims not actionable under consumer protection law

Aloudi v. Intramedic Research Group, LLC, 2015 WL 4148381, No. 15-cv-00882 (N.D. Cal. Jul. 9, 2015)   Aloudi brought the usual California/warranty claims against IRG for its claims about its JavaSLIM product, a “green coffee bean extract weight loss formula.” … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Amicus seeking rehearing in In re GNC

Brian Wolfman and I just filed this amicus on behalf of law professors seeking rehearing in the In re GNC case, which badly misunderstood literal falsity. from Blogger http://ift.tt/1M6pdSX

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

And his fate is still unlearn’d: Subway overcharge claim fails

Hollander v. Metropolitan Transp. Authority, 2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 50991(U), 2015 WL 4077193, No. 160972/13 (Sup. Ct. June 25, 2015)   Hollander sued the MTA on behalf of purchasers of 7–Day and 30–Day MetroCards, alleging they were falsely advertised because … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Reading list: Christine Jolls on visual disclosures

Christine Jolls, Debiasing Through Law and the First Amendment, 67 Stan. L. Rev. 1411 (2015): Law often compels the disclosure of information in particular—and, increasingly today, in visual—forms. Some judges conclude that such modern disclosure requirements break with the First … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Venable on notable NAD product name ruling

Amy Mudge and Randall Shaheen explain the NAD’s take on product names: if you put two terms together, as in “Nourishing Coconut Shampoo,” the ingredient has to provide the benefit.  If not, it has to be called “Nourishing Shampoo with … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

UK ad regulator disapproves of negative puffery

One big difference between the US and the EU in comparative advertising is that what we would consider negative puffery, like “overpriced,” the EU bans as not sufficiently objective.  In this ASA adjudication, the advertiser both ran a review site … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Trademark scholars roundtable: the consumer in different contexts

Session 3:  The Consumer in Different Trade Mark Contexts Do the questions that we have looked at in the first two sessions vary in different trademark and adjacent contexts? Is assessment of the reaction of the average consumer in trade … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Fourth Circuit destroys literal falsity

In re GNC Corp., — F.3d –, 2015 WL 3798174 (4th Cir. June 19, 2015)   Well, this is a terrible opinion that makes no sense.  In the Fourth Circuit, if reasonable experts disagree, it’s now impossible for one to … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Ninth Circuit rejects class certification because ads differed

Cabral v. Supple LLC, — Fed.Appx. —-, 2015 WL 3855142, No. 13–55943 (9th Cir. June 23, 2015)   The court of appeals vacated the certification of a class of purchasers of a dietary supplement. The certified class was “[a]ll persons … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

claim of “improved” version of competitor’s product not likely to confuse

Arborjet, Inc. v. Rainbow Treecare Scientific Advancements, Inc., 63 F.Supp.3d 149 (D. Mass. 2014)   Arborjet sued Rainbow over an alleged breach of a sales agency agreement and won a preliminary injunction.  Arborjet makes insect and pest control products for … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment