-
Recent Posts
- From the archives: knitalikes
- Honey Badger Don’t Care (4th of July edition)
- An Antitrust Framework for False Advertising, out now
- Reading list: Discrimination is Unfair: Interpreting UDA(A)P to Prohibit Discrimination
- Reading list: The Kids Don’t Stand a Chance: Unfair and Deceptive Advertising in Children’s Apps
Recent Comments
Archives
- 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: first amendment
Videos in conjunction with my advertising law class
In this pandemic year, I’m experimenting with short videos as part of the pre-class materials. They generally elaborate on a point to set up class discussion. I’m sharing them because, as Tom Lehrer says, they might prove useful to some … Continue reading
I can’t believe it’s not (vegan) butter: First Amendment invalidates standard of identity for butter as applied to vegan product
Miyoko’s Kitchen v. Ross, No. 20-cv-00893-RS (N.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2020) Eric Goldman’s far more anti-regulatory take is here. The California Department of Food and Agriculture told Miyoko’s not to call its “vegan butter” product “butter” (it challenged certain other … Continue reading
Covid cure “church” can’t avoid false advertising investigation
Morningside Church, Inc. v. Rutledge, 2020 WL 4333539, — F.Supp.3d —-, No. 3:20-cv-05050-MDH (W.D. Mo. Jul. 7, 2020) “Plaintiffs are a not-for-profit corporation, which describes itself as a church, a for-profit corporation, wholly owned by the church, and an individual … Continue reading
Announcing the Fifth Edition of Advertising & Marketing Law: Cases & Materials by Goldman & Tushnet
(Crossposted from Eric’s blog, with thanks to my assistant Andrew Matthiesen and Eric for all the work they did to get the book out.) Eric Goldman and I are pleased to announce the fifth edition of our casebook, Advertising & … Continue reading
Selling scammy books is protected by the First Amendment when selling scammy products isn’t
Federal Trade Comm’n v. Agora Financial, LLC, 2020 WL 998734, No. 1:19-cv-3100-SAG (D. Md. Mar. 2, 2020) The defendants do relatively well here by selling scammy and deceptive books. To the extent that the deception is contained in the books, … Continue reading
Cal. court says “controversial” claim is therefore not factual
Serova v. Sony Music Entertainment, 44 Cal.App.5th 103 (2020) Hard to believe the reasoning in this case could get worse, but they may have achieved it. The California Supreme Court told the court of appeals to reconsider its earlier decision … Continue reading
YouTube’s terms of service/content policies aren’t commercial advertising or promotion
Prager Univ. v. Google LLC, No. 18-15712 (9th Cir. Feb. 26, 2020) YouTube isn’t a public forum and didn’t engage in false advertising by telling users it supported freedom of expression. Prager “University” (it’s not) complained that YT was discriminating … Continue reading
e-cigarette sellers must substantiate greater population-level safety to make “safer” claims
Nicopure Labs, LLC v. Food & Drug Admin., No. 17-5196 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 10, 2019) In the Tobacco Control Act, Congress gave the FDA additional authority to regulate tobacco because previous measures “failed adequately to curb tobacco use by adolescents.” … 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
