Remove Brands Remove Confidentiality Remove False Advertising Remove Settlement
article thumbnail

When Do Inbound Call Logs Show Consumer Confusion?–Adler v McNeil

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

This case involves Jim Adler, a/k/a the “Texas Hammer,” a Texas lawyer who has spent $100M+ on advertising to build his brand. Bye, Goff * Yet More Evidence That Keyword Advertising Lawsuits Are Stupid–Porta-Fab v. Allied Modular * Griper’s Keyword Ads May Constitute False Advertising (Huh?)–LoanStreet

article thumbnail

Coach narrowly alleges grounds for cancellation of similar marks

43(B)log

and [the] Coach” brand. accused product another another The subsequent stipulation to a permanent injunction did not cover the registrations, but there is apparently a confidential settlement agreement that may have covered them. Chunma USA, Inc., 2021 WL 1534988, No. 20-CV-0271 (JMF) (S.D.N.Y.

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

Georgia Supreme Court Blesses Google’s Keyword Ad Sales–Edible IP v. Google

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The court says that trademark law: permits the use of trade names as long as referencing other brand names does not confuse consumers and is not deceptive. 1-800 Contacts. * FTC Explains Why It Thinks 1-800 Contacts’ Keyword Ad Settlements Were Anti-Competitive–FTC v. However, Edible invoked theft law and disavowed consumer confusion.

IP 129
article thumbnail

Internal Search Results Aren’t Trademark Infringing–PEM v. Peninsula

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

I raised this taxonomical issue with the Network Automation case , which involved niche-y job scheduler software where a consumer who is new to the niche might not know the various brands when starting a search. Bye, Goff * Yet More Evidence That Keyword Advertising Lawsuits Are Stupid–Porta-Fab v. LoanStreet v. Reyes & Adler v.

article thumbnail

Court Dismisses Trademark Claims Over Internal Search Results–Las Vegas Skydiving v. Groupon

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Las Vegas Skydiving Adventures offers tandem skydiving under the “Fyrosity” brand. Melwani sells products under the “Royal Silk” brand. 1-800 Contacts. * FTC Explains Why It Thinks 1-800 Contacts’ Keyword Ad Settlements Were Anti-Competitive–FTC v. It has never offered its services through Groupon.

article thumbnail

Google’s Search Disambiguation Doesn’t Create Initial Interest Confusion–Aliign v. lululemon

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

lululemon’s brand also displays prominently in its keyword ads. McNeil. * Three Keyword Advertising Decisions in a Week, and the Trademark Owners Lost Them All. * Competitor Gets Pyrrhic Victory in False Advertising Suit Over Search Ads–Harbor Breeze v. Labeled search results. Reyes & Adler v.

article thumbnail

Fifth Circuit Says Keyword Ads Could Contribute to Initial Interest Confusion (UGH)–Adler v. McNeil

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

BONUS : Plaintiffs allege that the marketing rights that Stevens and Hughes purchased from Google and Facebook directed searches for the Blaux brand to [link] where Stevens and Hughes sold products that competed with the Blaux portable air conditioner. McNeil Consultants, LLC , 2021 WL 3508713 (5th Cir. DFO Global Performance Commerce Ltd.