Remove Brands Remove Copying Remove Definition Remove False Advertising
article thumbnail

copying/explicit references let Roblox proceed with dubious (c) claim; Lego should be watching

43(B)log

Wowwee sells a line of dolls called “My Avastars,” which plaintiffs allege were “copied directly from Roblox’s Classic Avatars.” Looking at the side by side pictures in the complaint, this is a bit hard to swallow, but the evidence of copying/references to Roblox clearly bleed over from the TM side.

Copying 94
article thumbnail

Two hospitals can both be best, and use purple ads (for now at least)

43(B)log

1, 2024) NYU Langone sued Northwell for trade dress infringement, unfair competition and false designation of origin, and false advertising under the Lanham Act, as well as related claims under the New York GBL and New York common law. The court dismissed the complaint—the false advertising claims with prejudice.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

WIPIP 2022, Session 7 (internet law/antitrust)

43(B)log

Businesses harm consumers only in a few ways—false advertising, monopoly prices, defective products. Role definitions can render certain interpretations “irrational.” A: yes, you could definitely find problems there—restrictive terms, deplatforming, refusal to deal on nondiscriminatory basis. We like copying!

Law 119
article thumbnail

2d Cir. attempts to explain when puffery can be found as a matter of law

43(B)log

ICC develops model building codes and standards; it sued a competitor, UpCodes, for false advertising (Lanham Act, NY GBL, and common law unfair competition). ICC also publishes “Custom Codes” that integrate these amendments into its codes; it sells physical and electronic copies of both kinds of codes. UpCodes Inc.,

article thumbnail

WIPIP session 7: Design Law

43(B)log

A: definitely could be a factor. You can copy a Rembrandt and do a beautiful job but it’s not a Rembrandt.” They’ve changed the design, but still claim authenticity: the authenticity is the brand. Design w/in Reach was selling its copies as “museum quality reproductions.” PTO did a lot of work on the patent side.

Designs 59
article thumbnail

IPSC Breakout Session #1

43(B)log

So too w/false advertising. Assumptions skipped over in TM/false advertising analysis.] Protecting brand investment and consumers? That’s where disclosure rules need the most attention: definition and relation to what courts are going to do with the registration. Death closes things off. TESS is a mess.

article thumbnail

Internal Search Results Aren’t Trademark Infringing–PEM v. Peninsula

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The court says there can’t be MULTIPLE instances of INITIAL interest confusion: By definition, initial interest confusion is “confusion that creates initial customer interest.” the rival included ad copy telling consumers they were buying the trademark owner’s items when they weren’t. LoanStreet v.