Remove 2023 Remove Branding Remove Brands Remove False Advertising
article thumbnail

Amazon escapes liability for its Brand Registry advertising

43(B)log

Lei, 2023 WL 6373073, No. 21, 2023) Deetsch alleged that he owned design patents for CPAP pillow products, which the Lei defendants infringed. In December 2020, Deetsch notified Amazon of his patents through the Brand Registry portal and asked Amazon to remove the Lei defendants’ products. 22-cv-1166-RSH-BLM (S.D.

article thumbnail

Another API (c) case with false advertising and contract claims too

43(B)log

Defendants allegedly copied key components of Trackman’s copyrighted software and falsely suggested, in promotions and advertisements, that defendants were authorized to use the well-known courses in their game. Although the court dismissed a contract claim, copyright and false advertising claims survived.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

alleged misrepresentation of partnership/approval suffices for false advertising claim

43(B)log

2023 WL 8586681, No. 8, 2023) When does TM logic creep into false advertising cases? Tundra solicits sellers on Faire’s platform to provide their Faire Direct links to retailers registered with Tundra by “promising to promote their brands to new retailers and give them greater exposure” to Tundra retailers.

article thumbnail

"#1 Brand" claim was literally false because of apples-to-oranges comparison

43(B)log

4, 2024) Finding Zesty Paws’ “#1 Brand” claim literally false, the court grants a preliminary injunction despite Zesty Paws’ attempt to create a factual dispute about what a “brand” is. The dispute turned on what a “brand” is; Zesty Paws argued that Nutramax was not a brand, but Cosequin etc. Nutramax Labs.,

article thumbnail

no disgorgement under state law when false advertising wasn't shown to result in sales

43(B)log

BBK Tobacco & Foods, LLP, 2023 WL 3004625, No. 19, 2023) Previous discussion. A jury found that defendant HBI engaged in unfair competition and violated the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act (IUDTPA” in its packaging and promotional activities for its RAW Organic Hemp branded tobacco rolling paper products.

article thumbnail

False patent marking claims survive even when Dastar bars false advertising claims based on "innovation"

43(B)log

30, 2024) (R&R) Recommendation: Dastar should block Qingdao’s Lanham Act false advertising counterclaims based on Lashify’s claim to be the originator of lash technology, but false patent marking counterclaims should survive. 11, 2023 (claiming that various products were “patented”). 1, 2017 to Apr.

article thumbnail

Section 230 Helps Amazon Defeat False Advertising Lawsuit Over Printer Ink Cartridges–Planet Green v. Amazon

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The court simply responds: “the Ninth Circuit has held that Section 230 immunity applies to false advertising claims and other claims that are based on purportedly false representations.” This argument has failed so many times. See, e.g., the cited Ynfante v. Google opinion. ” Cites to Perfect 10 v.