-
Recent Posts
- Mexican flag and “taste of Mexico” not enough to deceive reasonable consumers about non-Mexican origin, 2d Cir rules
- court: there’s no right to jury trial when seeking only injunction/disgorgement in false advertising case
- alleged price bait-and-switch with large “processing fee” suffices to plead Lanham Act false advertising
- Great balls of fire: lawsuit over malt sold looking nearly identical to whisky can continue
- Second Circuit signals some minimal flexibility on Polaroid analysis in another strip club false endorsement case
Recent Comments
Archives
- May 2023
- April 2023
- 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: unfairness
competitor succeeds in enjoining sale of competing but non-FDA-cleared medical devices
Telebrands Corp. v. Vindex Solutions LLC, 2021 WL 534361, No. 21-cv-00898-BLF (N.D. Cal. Feb. 12, 2021) Telebrands sells stuff, including the Hempvana Rocket, a handheld transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) unit, “a pain-relieving pen that uses TENS therapy in the … Continue reading
Disparate impact isn’t “unfair” for consumer protection purposes, court indicates
Schulte v. Conopco, Inc., No. 20-2696 (8h Cir. May 18, 2021) This would make a great student note topic: Is disparate impact “unfair” under state consumer protection laws? The court here implicitly says no, without ever confronting the question directly. … Continue reading
Homeopathy claims weren’t unfair in the absence of proven falsity
Allen v. Hyland’s, Inc., 2021 WL 718295, No. CV 12-1150-DMG (MANx) (C.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2021) This class action, about whether certain homeopathic products didn’t perform as indicated on the packaging, went to a jury trial that ended in Hyland’s … Continue reading
TM choice of law: P’s primary place of business determines which state’s law applies
Lontex Corp. v. Nike, Inc., 2021 WL 3170600, No. 18-5623 (E.D. Pa. Jul. 27, 2021) A rare choice of law opinion involving competitors. This is a trademark infringement claim but Lontex asserted claims under various state unfair trade practices law. … Continue reading
a rare freestanding UCL unfairness claim re: service termination that rendered cameras nonfunctional
Soo v. Lorex Corp., 2020 WL 5408117, No. 20-cv-01437-JSC (N.D Cal. Sept. 9, 2020) Plaintiffs brought California and New York consumer protection claims based on what happened to their home security Flir cameras; defendants moved to compel arbitration, which was … Continue reading
Placebo effect is ok by CLRA: Homeopathic remedy wins jury trial on false advertising, still needs to defend against “unfairness”
Allen v. Hylands, Inc., — Fed.Appx. —-, 2019 WL 2142843, No. 17-56184 (9th Cir. May 15, 2019) Allen, on behalf of a class, appealled following a jury’s verdict in favor of Hyland’s. “The gravamen of [Allen’s] claims is that Hyland’s … Continue reading
What’s UpCounsel? LegalForce thinks it’s false advertising
LegalForce RAPC Worldwide P.C. v. UpCounsel, Inc., 2019 WL 160335, No. 18-cv-02573-YGR (N.D. Cal. Jan. 10, 2019) LegalForce’s litigation against various competitors in the trademark registration world continues. UpCounsel “is an online marketplace for legal services that enables users (primarily … Continue reading
In which I sue Amazon again
In FTC v. Amazon, the initial opinion was heavily, albeit badly, redacted. With the able assistance of Paul Alan Levy from Public Citizen, MediaPost and I have moved to unseal the opinion and the documents on which it’s based, on … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged ftc, In which I sue Amazon again false advertising, my lawsuits, unfairness
Leave a comment
FTC rules don’t explain excessive redactions in FTC v. Amazon
F.T.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc., NO. C14-1038-JCC (W.D. Wash. Apr. 26, 2016) Amazon made it really easy for kids to make in-app purchases in “free” apps; the court agreed with the FTC that this was bad, denying the FTC’s request … Continue reading