Last week the FTC published a Complaint and proposed Consent Order in In re Bollman Hat Company et al. addressing two hot topics: Made in USA ad claims, which have been an agency focus for decades, and “selfie” and...more
In January 2016 and January 2017, we blogged about a trademark and copyright dispute between Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. and My Other Bag, Inc. (“MOB”) over a line of canvas tote bags that parodied Louis Vuitton’s iconic...more
1/19/2018
/ Attorney's Fees ,
Copyright Infringement ,
Dilution ,
Exceptions ,
Fashion Branding ,
Lanham Act ,
Louis Vuitton ,
Octane Fitness v. ICON ,
Parody ,
Summary Judgment ,
The Copyright Act
We’ve blogged about recent enforcement actions taken by the FTC against companies using deceptive “selfie” certification marks. These are seals of approval created by or otherwise affiliated with the companies whose products...more
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board recently affirmed a refusal to register the mark 8-Bit Aleworks for beer based on two prior registrations for the mark 8 bit Brewing Company for beer and other alcoholic malt beverages,...more
We have previously blogged about claims brought by Lions Gate Entertainment against a TD Ameritrade ad campaign featuring the tagline “Nobody puts your old 401K in a corner.” This was an obvious and humorous allusion to the...more
For many years, consumers have relied on certification marks like the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval and the UL logo as an assurance of product quality. Administered by independent organizations, consumers reasonably...more
Well-known perfume marketer Coty Inc. had a big win in New York federal district court, obtaining injunctive relief and $6.5 million dollars in an accounting of profits from copycat perfume seller Excell Brands, LLC. In an...more
9/29/2017
/ Advertising ,
Brand ,
Dilution ,
Fair Use ,
False Advertising ,
Injunctive Relief ,
Nominative Fair Use Doctrine ,
Trade Dress ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks
As we blogged about earlier this month, the FTC seems to have spent much of its summer checking out influencer advertising and focusing its attention on those who fail to make the necessary disclosures of material connections...more
We blogged last week about the FTC’s triple play against deceptive influencer advertising. In one prong of the initiative, the FTC announced that its staff had sent 21 follow-up warning letters to influencers, asking them to...more
A recent Trademark Trial and Appeal Board decision sustained an opposition based on the applicant’s failure to identify a co-owner at the time the application was filed, resulting in the application being declared void ab...more
When two different companies adopt confusingly similar trademarks and use them in different parts of the United States, complications ensue. The adjudication of the respective rights of the parties will depend on the...more
Last week, the FTC announced a Complaint and proposed settlement with two trampoline sellers, brothers Sonny and Bobby Le. The Les sold Infinity and Olympus Pro brand trampolines through three websites that touted...more
The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, with a ringing endorsement of Prof. McCarthy’s trademark law treatise, issued a precedential opinion last week on the issue of whether a trademark is owned by the manufacturer or...more
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued an important decision about the bona fide intent requirement when filing an intent to use (“ITU”) application and the consequences when there is a lack of bona fide intent as...more
Comparative advertising can be highly effective in touting the advantages of a company’s products against those of its competitor, but the language used must be carefully crafted and accompanying visual depictions should be...more
Last January, we blogged about a district court decision involving trademark parody in Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. v. My Other Bag, Inc. In that decision, the court held that defendant My Other Bag had convincingly argued...more
In previous posts, we’ve discussed the Federal Trade Commission’s significant enforcement efforts focused on two hot button issues: unsubstantiated health marketing claims and deceptive product endorsements. Once again, both...more
Last week we blogged about a recent decision of the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau, holding that two YouTube videos for Rayovac brand batteries misleadingly communicated an unsupported “line”...more
Two recent decisions of the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau provide helpful insights into how product performance comparisons should (and should not) be crafted to be considered fair comparative...more
A recent decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit highlights the perils of delay in filing a motion for a preliminary injunction in a trademark infringement case. In Wreal, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc....more
Medical endorsements can be powerful selling tools for health care products. But if a medical professional has a connection to the company marketing the products that would be material to consumers in evaluating the...more
An advertising slogan like “A Diamond is Forever” may be eternal, but the same cannot be said about some comparative advertising claims. If a company advertises its product as superior to a competitive product, the ad claim...more
What is the difference between an advertisement that is literally false by necessary implication and one that is impliedly false? It may seem like a fine (and somewhat opaque) distinction, but determining the particular way...more
On September 9, 2016, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued an interesting decision in a false advertising case involving a dispute between competitors in the home pregnancy testing market. Church & Dwight Co. v....more
Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act is generally considered a broad-based vehicle for asserting false advertising claims. For the owner and operator of the Trump Hotel Las Vegas, however, the statutory section was not broad...more