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

copying competitor's website & reviews creates (c), TM, false advertising problems

43(B)log

Boston Suburban allegedly continued to use the “Logan Car Service” mark in online keyword advertising and in metatags, and continued to copy customer reviews from Boston Carriage’s website and publish them on online review platforms. This included a state-law dilution claim, since state law required only distinctiveness.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

no disgorgement under state law when false advertising wasn't shown to result in sales

43(B)log

Republic alleged that HBI, its competitor in the tobacco rolling paper industry, engaged in false advertising under the Lanham Act, unfair competition, and violations of the IUDTPA. The court granted an injunction focusing on the Alcoy claims, which were false. There was no special verdict form.

article thumbnail

false advertising as a workaround when municipal codes are copied?

43(B)log

It allegedly sold or gave away unauthorized copies of the I-Codes and Custom Codes to both customers and prospective customers. Finally, UpCodes allegedly falsely claimed to be the “only source” of state amendments integrated into the model code, when in fact ICC also offers custom codes on its website. UpCodes, Inc.,

article thumbnail

Section 230 Helps Amazon Defeat False Advertising Lawsuit Over Printer Ink Cartridges–Planet Green v. Amazon

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The court simply responds: “the Ninth Circuit has held that Section 230 immunity applies to false advertising claims and other claims that are based on purportedly false representations.” Section 230 more clearly applies to third-party ad copy than to the resulting sales. See, e.g., the cited Ynfante v.

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.

article thumbnail

Griper’s Keyword Ads May Constitute False Advertising (Huh?)–LoanStreet v. Troia

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The court cites a mix of competitor lawsuits (which this is clearly not) and some antiquated 20+ year old griper precedent that are no longer credible law since the more modern approaches to gripers. And how can consumers be “diverted” with the ad copy accurately previewed what consumers could expect to get at the link terminus?