43(B)log

AUGUST 25, 2022

The false advertising parts: Jeong alleged that Nexo advertised to consumers that it does not own users’ collateral (e.g., Clients retain 100% ownership of their digital assets. while acting otherwise—eventually invoking its ownership right over users’ collateral to justify liquidation of that collateral (e.g.

False Advertising 59

False Advertising Ownership Advertising Advertising 59

43(B)log

MAY 19, 2023

Roblox sued for copyright infringement, false advertising, trademark infringement, false association and false designation of origin, trade dress infringement, intentional interference with contractual relations, breach of contract, and false advertising and unfair competition under California law.

Copying 94

Copying False Advertising Social Media Advertising 94

43(B)log

OCTOBER 26, 2021

Wyndham Vacation Ownership, Inc. 20, 2021) In this timeshare exit false advertising litigation, the court excludes Wyndham’s expert. Timeshare exit entities like defendant TET used “online advertising and oral sales pitches to timeshare owners to convince them to sign up for TET’s service.” Sussman, 2021 WL 4948099, No.

False Advertising 59

False Advertising Advertising Advertising Contracts 59

43(B)log

JULY 20, 2022

Chiusa’s claims: willful copyright infringement; breach of the oral distribution agreement; trademark infringement, false advertising, trade dress/trade name infringement, and false designation of origin undre the Lanham Act; a Tennessee Consumer Protection Act claim; and conversion.

False Advertising 72

False Advertising Ownership Registration Designs 72

The IPKat

JUNE 27, 2022

On 24 June 2022, BAYC sued Ryder Ripps, a conceptual artist and NFT creator for trade mark infringement, unfair competition, false advertising, cybersquatting and other cause of actions before the Central District of California. This is a U.S

Non-Fungible Tokens 135

Non-Fungible Tokens Contracts Copying Art 135

43(B)log

OCTOBER 4, 2021

WPI counterclaimed against Restellini and third-party Institut Restellini SAS – Documentation Centre alleging copyright infringement and false advertising. But WPI’s allegations still went to contested ownership of the information contained in the Modigliani Material, rather than the Modigliani Material as a physical product.

False Advertising 59

False Advertising Artwork IP Advertising 59

43(B)log

FEBRUARY 6, 2023

Here, there was a realistic likelihood of recurrence alleged given defendants’ “pattern of willful and deliberate behavior over the course of several years, as well as the continued ownership and control of Roomster by the two named individual Defendants who run the company,” despite their knowledge of the investigation.

False Advertising 72

False Advertising Confidentiality Advertising Advertising 72