article thumbnail

Monster wins permanent injunction against VPX in false advertising case

43(B)log

12, 2023) Following a large verdict for Monster on false advertising claims, this opinion discusses extensively the requirements for injunctive relief in false advertising cases. Are lost prospective customers and market share purely economic harms? So too with lost market share. and] expects to complete.

article thumbnail

False patent marking claims survive even when Dastar bars false advertising claims based on "innovation"

43(B)log

30, 2024) (R&R) Recommendation: Dastar should block Qingdao’s Lanham Act false advertising counterclaims based on Lashify’s claim to be the originator of lash technology, but false patent marking counterclaims should survive. 1, 2017 to Apr. 11, 2023 (claiming that various products were “patented”).

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

Intellectual Property Rights for Social Media Influencers

IIPRD

‘Influencer marketing,’ albeit a new word, has emerged as one of the most effective strategies to create money across all industries. A Social Media Influencer is someone who creates unique material that keeps people interested on multiple social media platforms, causing them to return for more high-quality information.

article thumbnail

MLM on MLM action: tortious interference, trade secret, but not false advertising

43(B)log

It Works Marketing, Inc. The claims are mostly the kind of trade secret/tortious interference claims you’d expect from this setup, and I won’t say much about them, but there is also a false advertising claim about alleged misrepresentations of distributors’ income with Melaleuca. Melaleuca, Inc., 2021 WL 1650266, No.

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

Dastar bars false marking claims brought under Lanham Act (dubitante)

43(B)log

17, 2023) Super-interesting holding that, while there’s no patent field preemption against bringing false patent marking claims under the Lanham Act, Dastar (as expansively interpreted to cover false advertising claims) does preclude such claims, possibly only because of party argument. Dismissed with leave to amend.

article thumbnail

student social media use of school colors/logo not plausibly confusing

43(B)log

18, 2021) Doe, a real a **e (“deeply unsympathetic,” to use the court’s terms), advertised “ASU Covid Parties” on a similarly-named Instagram account and spewed a lot of bile as well as, in its first post, using ASU’s colors. The Board sued Doe for trademark infringement and related claims; Doe defaulted.