Remove Advertising Remove Definition Remove False Advertising Remove Privacy
article thumbnail

"advertising injury" insurance exclusion doesn't exclude false advertising claims

43(B)log

28, 2021) Mostly this case is about other things, but the court finds a duty to defend in the underlying false advertising case. Luxottica was sued in a class action alleging that its AccuFit system for prescription eyeglasses was falsely advertised as more accurate.

article thumbnail

Advertising injury policy's IP exclusion means ROP claims aren't covered

43(B)log

lawsuits against clubs for advertising them with images of models without those models’ consent. The relevant policy provides coverage for bodily injury, property injury, and advertising injury, subject to certain conditions and exclusions. Covered personal/advertising injury included d.

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

adult venue's insurer did not successfully exclude ads from ad injury coverage

43(B)log

26, 2024) Defendant, d/b/a Wonderland, operated an adult entertainment club and was one of the many such sued by various models for using their images in advertising without their consent from 2015 to 2019. The court found that definition of “Exhibitions and Related Marketing” was so broad as to “preclude coverage in almost any circumstance.”

article thumbnail

The fact/opinion divide: threat or menace? 9th Cir revives suit against Malwarebytes

43(B)log

Enigma sued its competitor Malwarebytes for Lanham Act false advertising and NY business torts for designating its products as “malicious,” “threats,” and “potentially unwanted programs” (PUPs). Enigma’s allegations, including definitions of “threat” from statutes and other authorities, still had a subjective component.

article thumbnail

The SHOP SAFE Act Is a Terrible Bill That Will Eliminate Online Marketplaces

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

.” Clearly, the second part of that definition targets Amazon and other major marketplaces, such as eBay, Walmart Marketplace, and Etsy. The first part of the definition includes services with “publicly interactive features that allow for arranging the sale or purchase of goods.”

Trademark 137
article thumbnail

The 9th Circuit Keeps Trying to Ruin Cybersecurity–Enigma v. Malwarebytes

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

And then…the Ninth Circuit got the case again… The Majority Opinion After the Supreme Court cert denial, the district court ruled that Malwarebytes’ “malicious” and “threat” classifications were “non-actionable statements of opinion” and thus could not support a Lanham Act false advertising claim.

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. Business frame obscures broader privacy harms. Role definitions can render certain interpretations “irrational.” What are you going to do instead, advertise on Bing? Their general monopoly claim was stronger.

Law 119