article thumbnail

False Patent Marking as False Advertising: Overcoming Dastar

Patently-O

Dawgs’ (“Dawgs”) counterclaim for false advertising under the Lanham Act. In 2016, Dawgs added new asserted counterclaims against Crocs, including a claim for false advertising under the Lanham Act. Crocs largely prevailed in those actions. 1125(a)(1)(B) (Section 43 of the Lanham Act).

article thumbnail

Judge Noreika Grants Defendant’s Post-Trial Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law Reversing the Jury’s Finding of Liability for False Advertising under the Lanham Act and Award of Punitive Damages Against Defendant

Delaware Intellectual Property Litigation Blog

January 5, 2022), the Court granted Defendant Next Caller’s post-trial renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law of no false advertising under the Lanham Act and to take away the jury’s award of punitive damages. A copy of the Memorandum Opinion is attached. The Court granted Defendant’s motion for two reasons.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Intellectual Property Rights for Social Media Influencers

IIPRD

A common issue among digital influencers is whether the content they generate is protected by intellectual property rights. Types of Intellectual Property Rights applicable to Digital Influencers. Why should digital influencers defend their intellectual property rights? Yes, the answer is yes!

article thumbnail

Tiktok's other, smaller legal problem

43(B)log

In brief: Meishe argued that Tiktok copied its code via an employee who departed. False advertising: Meishe pointed to statements defendants made in their copyright notice at tiktok.com, in the ByteDance Code of Conduct, in TikTok’s Intellectual Property Policy, and in TikTok’s terms of service. Tiktok Inc.,

article thumbnail

Judge Noreika Grants Defendant’s Post-Trial Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law Reversing the Jury’s Finding of Liability for False Advertising under the Lanham Act and Award of Punitive Damages Against Defendant

LexBlog IP

January 5, 2022), the Court granted Defendant Next Caller’s post-trial renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law of no false advertising under the Lanham Act and to take away the jury’s award of punitive damages. A copy of the Memorandum Opinion is attached. ” Id.

article thumbnail

Announcing the Sixth Edition of Advertising & Marketing Law: Cases & Materials by Tushnet & Goldman

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Price: $9.99. * Print-on-demand hard copy from Amazon. Buyers of the hard copy can also get a free PDF file by emailing me a copy of their receipt showing which edition they bought. If you are a professor, or are hoping to teach the course, and would like a free evaluation copy, please email me (egoldman@gmail.com).

Editing 121
article thumbnail

District of Delaware Grants Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Plaintiff Damages Expert’s Testimony in False Advertising Action under the Lanham Act

Delaware Intellectual Property Litigation Blog

CareDx’s Lanham Act claims were based on allegations that Natera falsely represented that Natera’s Prospera kidney transplant test is superior to CareDx’s Allosure Kidney test. A copy of the Memorandum Opinion is attached. According to CareDx, ‘[u]nder 15 U.S.C.