-
Recent Posts
- “upcycling” isn’t infringement/counterfeiting when full disclosure is present
- court refuses to dismiss TM claims against NRA’s former PR agency
- Second Circuit affirms flushable wipes damages class certification, disallows injunctive class
- “Keratin Caring” doesn’t convey keratin content to reasonable consumers
- Fla district court rejects argument that “completely unsubstantiated advertising” is literally false on sj
Recent Comments
Archives
- 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: standing
“wasabi peas” can be made with horseradish without injuring consumers given widespread use
Yothers v. JFC Int’l, Inc., No. 20-cv-01657-RS, 2020 WL 5015262 (N.D. Cal. May 14, 2020) Defendants sell “wasabi peas,” which, “allegedly like 95–99% of ‘wasabi’ products sold in North America, contains not Wasabia japonica but Amoracia rusticana, more commonly known … Continue reading
another advertiser’s Google click fraud suit is revived
Singh v. Google LLC, 2020 WL 5202081, — Fed.Appx. —-, 2020 WL 5202081 (9th Cir. Sept. 1, 2020) The court of appeals reverses the dismissal of Singh’s California FAL/UCL claims against Google for allegedly charging for fraudulent clicks despite its … Continue reading
Lack of competitive injury dooms false advertising claim against unauthorized image use by strip club
Geiger v. Creative Impact Inc., No. CV-18-01443-PHX-JAT, 2020 WL 4583625 (D. Ariz. Aug. 10, 2020) The court rejects a motion to reconsider its ruling rejecting Lanham Act false advertising claims based the unauthorized use of plaintiffs’ images by a strip … Continue reading
selling w/in another distributor’s exclusive territory isn’t plausibly false advertising of authorization
Northern Bottling Co. v. Henry’s Foods, Inc., No. 1:19-cv-021, 2020 WL 4208526 (D.N.D. Jul. 22, 2020) Northern is a PepsiCo bottler/distributor; it has some Exclusive Bottling Appointments that appoint Northern as PepsiCo’s “exclusive bottler, to bottle and distribute” a specific … Continue reading
Just stocking a falsely advertised product isn’t enough for contributory liability
In re Outlaw Laboratory, LLP, 2020 WL 2797425, No. 18-CV-0840-GPC (S.D. Cal. May 29, 2020) Plaintiff makes male enhancement products, allegedly in compliance with the DHSEA. It sued 51 convenience and liquor stores in the San Diego, California area; 23 … Continue reading
“Belgium 1926” label on chocolate plausibly indicates current Belgian origin
Hesse v. Godiva Chocolatier, Inc., 2020 WL 2793014 No. 19-cv-972 (AJN) (S.D.N.Y. May 29, 2020) The forgiving plausibility standard allows consumer protection claims about Godiva’s use of “Belgium 1926” on its American-made chocolates to continue. The court points out that, … Continue reading
Reasonable restaurant consumers wouldn’t think “krab mix” had real crab in it
Kang v. P.F. Chang’s China Bistro, Inc., No. CV 19-02252 PA (SPx), 2020 WL 2027596 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2020) Kang alleged that P.F. Chang’s “employed a classic bait and switch tactic whereby it falsely labeled and advertised food products … Continue reading
Judge Alsup seems to think cosmetic mask claims are false
Miller v. Peter Thomas Roth, LLC, 2020 WL 363045, No. C 19-00698 WHA (N.D. Cal. Jan. 22, 2020) OK, he doesn’t say so outright, but wait for the bit about the in-court demonstration he expects. Defendants PTR Labs sell “specialty … Continue reading
