Remove Advertising Remove False Advertising Remove Privacy Remove Social Media
article thumbnail

False advertising-based antitrust claims against Facebook survive motion to dismiss

43(B)log

14, 2022) Once in a blue moon, a false advertising-based antitrust claim survives a motion to dismiss in a circuit that imposes a list of excessive requirements on such claims. Consumers and advertisers adequately alleged that Facebook has monopoly power in social network/social media (consumers) and social advertising markets.

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 consent judgment was a lump sum and, Princeton argued, included uncovered claims; most of the images fell within the 2017-18 period.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Got a Selfie With a Celebrity? Think Twice Before Using It In Ads–50 Cent v. Kogan

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

If the clinic is falsely claiming that he is, that’s false advertising and possibly defamation. If he is, either the clinic is violating medical privacy rules or 50 Cent consented to the disclosure, and that consent could potentially extend to the photo. This opinion raises more questions than it answers.

article thumbnail

Unreasoned Orders for Personality Rights

IP and Legal Filings

For example, can personality rights be viewed as an extension of the right to privacy? Scripps-Howard, the US Supreme Court distinguished the right of publicity from the right to privacy and ruled in favor of Zaccchini for the unauthorized broadcast of his performance by the defendant under publicity rights. Spelling-Goldberg Prods.,

article thumbnail

Section 230 Protects Services That Permit Anonymous Third-Party Posts–Bride v. Snap

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

A couple of specifics: The false advertising claims don’t escape 230: “Had those third-party users refrained from posting harmful content, Plaintiffs’ claims that Defendants falsely advertised and misrepresented their applications’ safety would not be cognizable.” ICS Provider. Case citation : Bride v.

article thumbnail

False endorsement remains broader than many state ROP laws

43(B)log

They brought claims under the Lanham Act, Wisconsin’s privacy statute, and Wisconsin’s common law of negligence. Walkowicz allegedly received multiple emails and social-media messages commenting on the similarities between Walkowicz and Luciana and inquiries about whether they had endorsed the doll.

Law 59
article thumbnail

IPSC Breakout Session #1

43(B)log

Dignitary interests: false light, IIED, privacy typically expire w/person. So too w/false advertising. Advertising: false endorsement potential. Actors’ strike is in part about who controls past performances if they’re being used to populate new media productions? Death closes things off.