article thumbnail

False Patent Marking as False Advertising: Overcoming Dastar

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch The Federal Circuit is set to consider the use of terms like “patented,” “proprietary,” and “exclusive” in commercial advertising can be actionable under § 43(a)(1)(B) of the Lanham Act when their use is not entirely accurate. Crocs largely prevailed in those actions. ” Dawgs brief.

article thumbnail

Advertisers Freedom To Make Ads

IP and Legal Filings

Introduction The promotion of products through defamatory or misleading remarks about the competitor’s product, known as “product disparagement,” can lead to legal disputes, blurring the line between this and comparative advertising. To prevent legal disputes, caution must be exercised to differentiate between the two.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Harpic v. Domex Advertisement: Product Disparagement or Nominative Fair Use?

SpicyIP

Domex Advertisement: Product Disparagement or Nominative Fair Use? An image of the comparative advertisement launched by Domex, wherein Domex explicitly asks which toilet cleaner fights bad smell for longer and makes a tick mark against Domex, with Harpic as another option next to it. Legal Position on Comparative Advertisement.

Fair Use 105
article thumbnail

Commercializing the Personalities of the Dead: The Dangers of the Posthumous Market

IPilogue

In 2020, a South Korean television and radio network, Munhwa Broadcasting Corporation, released a documentary that revealed one family’s journey in recreating their 7-year-old deceased daughter, Na-Yeon, through the technology of virtual reality (“VR”). This article was written as a requirement for Prof. Such technology is not novel.

Marketing 105
article thumbnail

California Supreme Court reaffirms strict liability for false advertising in Serova

43(B)log

The statements were “commercial advertising meant to sell a product, and generally there ‘can be no constitutional objection to the suppression of commercial messages that do not accurately inform the public.’” Not all marketing of artistic works is noncommercial speech. The California Supreme Court reversed.

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

continued desire to purchase TVs suffices for California standing

43(B)log

3, 2021) Plaintiffs alleged false advertising of TTE’s TVs in violation of California and New Jersey law; the court granted the motion to dismiss but allowed leave to amend as to injunctive relief claims. to assert that they would not have bought the televisions or would have paid less for the televisions had there been no false advertising).”