43(B)log

AUGUST 9, 2021

As alleged in the initial complaint, Charter mailed solicitations whose envelopes “used Windstream’s trademark and copied the same distinct color pattern from Windstream’s current advertising campaign.” Does its awareness of the stay mean that its false advertising violates the automatic stay? In re Alert Hldgs.,

False Advertising 119

False Advertising Advertising Advertising Law 119

43(B)log

AUGUST 18, 2021

were valid and infringed, but the latter wasn’t counterfeited; SMRI’s dilution victory was vacated, but not its victories on deceptive trade practices, ACPA, false advertising, and unfair competition. It was thus barred from equitable relief for its trademark infringement, false advertising, and state deceptive trade practices claims.

Cease and Desist 64

Cease and Desist False Advertising Registration Licensing 64

43(B)log

AUGUST 17, 2021

Plaintiffs sued for false advertising and false endorsement under the Lanham Act, violation of their right to publicity, deceptive trade practices under New York GBL Section 349, and defamation. 2021), which considered all these claims except for false advertising. The court was guided by Electra v. 3d 233 (2d Cir.

Social Media 59

Social Media False Advertising Advertising Advertising 59