Communications & Media Civil Procedure Constitutional Law

Read need-to-know updates, commentary, and analysis on Communications & Media issues written by leading professionals.
News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court Clarifies Standing Requirements in False Advertising Lawsuits

On March 25, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified who has the right to assert a federal claim for false advertising. In a unanimous ruling, the Court established that one company can sue another under the Lanham Act, the federal...more

Food Litigation Newsletter - April 22, 2014

In This Issue: - Decisions ..Court Dismisses In Part for Lack of Specificity ..Court Dismisses Evaporated Cane Juice Claims Where Labels Disclosed Sugar Content ..Court Dismisses In Part for Lack of...more

Digital Content Producers (Still) Lack Antitrust Standing to Sue Wireless Carriers Over MMS

In a prior post, I covered the district court’s decision in Davis v. AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. There, the Central District of California dismissed antitrust claims against various wireless telephone companies and other...more

California Federal Court Finds that the First Amendment Does Not Preclude Sporting Event Participants from Asserting...

On April 11, 2014, a California federal court issued a First Amendment ruling that has potentially significant implications for broadcasters in the sports-media industry. Specifically, the Northern District of California’s...more

Catholic Priest Permitted To Conceal Non-Privileged Nature Of Defamatory Communication Until Statute Of Limitations Runs

In a recent unanimous decision in Harrington v. Costello, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) held that the statute of limitations had run out on a Catholic priest’s defamation claim against his colleague, even...more

New “Twibel” Defamation Opinion Suggests Online Speech May Be Special After All

Many lawyers smirked and scoffed a few months ago when the popular press began touting the Courtney Love “Twibel” trial as a “landmark” case that would set a “major precedent.” In fact, as discussed further elsewhere, it was...more

The Supreme Court Redefines Standing Test for Lanham Act False Advertising Claims

On March 25, 2014, the Supreme Court clarified the standing requirements for false advertising claims brought under the Lanham Act. In Lexmark Intl., Inc. v. Static Control Components Inc., 572 U.S. ___ (2014), the Court, in...more

Federal Court Rejects Controversial Attempt To Expand Class Action Liability

In a putative class action in federal court, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey quickly put to rest a controversial theory advanced by the plaintiffs to allow them to sue defendants who admittedly caused...more

Advertising News & Analysis - April 17, 2014

In this issue: - Ortiz/Obama Selfie Exposes Social Media's Blurred Lines - DMCA Takedown? Not Without a Registration - Let It Go: A Tale of Assets Unfrozen - Upcoming Events - Excerpt from...more

Ninth Circuit Issues First Amendment Ruling in Court Filings Access Case

On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit issued an important opinion concerning the First Amendment in Courthouse News Service v. Michael Planet (Apr. 8, 2014 11-57187). Courthouse News Service (“CNS”) had filed the lawsuit against the...more

A Uniform Approach to Standing for False Advertising Claims under the Lanham Act

On March 25, 2014, the Supreme Court, in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., 572 U.S. ___ (2014), resolved a circuit split regarding the test for standing to assert a claim for false advertising...more

Supreme Court Inks Uniform Standing Test for Lanham Act False Advertising Claims

Key Takeaways - - The US Supreme Court created a uniform test for standing for false advertising claims under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, resolving a three-way circuit split. - The new standing test...more

The Future is Here - Is the Internet a Place?

The California Supreme Court has certified a question for review posed by the Ninth Circuit – Is the internet a “place of public accommodation” as described in the California Disabled Persons Act (“DPA”), Civil Code §§ 54, et...more

Williams v. Cahill

Williams v. Cahill - California Court of Appeal, March 26, 2014: California appellate court affirms denial of defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion, finding that, although defendant’s statements on ABC television show “20/20”...more

Non-Direct Competitors May Sue Under the Lanham Act, Doctrine of Prudential Standing Eliminated

The Supreme Court of the United States swept away the different standards for Lanham Act prudential standing previously applied by the courts of appeals, and expressly discarded the amorphous concept of prudential standing in...more

Court Issues Sweet Ruling for Plaintiffs in Mislabeling Action – Ignorance That “Evaporated Cane Juice” Is An Added Sugar Not...

In Morgan v. Wallaby Yogurt Co., Inc., the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied defendant’s motion to dismiss a class action complaint alleging violations of the UCL, FAL, and CLRA for...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Standing For False Advertising Claims Under The Lanham Act

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court on Tuesday, in the case of Lexmark Int'l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., ___ S.Ct. ___, Case 12-873 (Mar. 25, 2014), settled an open issue regarding the relevant test for...more

U.S. Supreme Court Settles Lanham Act Standing Conflict

On March 25, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Static Control Components, Inc. had the right to sue Lexmark International Inc. under the Lanham Act’s false advertising prong. In doing so, the Court established a new...more

United States Supreme Court Clarifies What Plaintiffs Have Standing to Sue for False Advertisement Under the Lanham Act – Lexmark...

In a March 25, 2014 decision, the United States Supreme Court clarified what class of plaintiffs have standing to sue for false advertisement under the Lanham Act (codified at 15 U.S.C. §1125(a)). Lexmark sells the...more

Litigation Alert: Supreme Court’s Lexmark Decision Creates Uniform Federal False Advertising Standing Requirement

On March 25, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Lexmark International v. Static Control Components, ruling that Static Control may proceed with its false advertising counterclaim under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act...more

Supreme Court Sets New Test in Lexmark for Whether a Party Has Standing to Bring a False Advertising Claim under the Lanham Act

On March 25, 2014, the Supreme Court in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., No. 12-873 (Mar. 25, 2014), ruled that a two-part inquiry pairing the zone-of-interests test and a proximate-cause...more

Supreme Court Espouses Standard for False Advertising Standing

The ongoing saga between Lexmark International and Static Control Components was kept alive by the Supreme Court in its March 25, 2014, unanimous decision affirming Static Control’s standing to bring a false advertising claim...more

Supreme Court Resolves Circuit Split on Standing in Lanham Act False Advertising Cases

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a circuit split on the crucial issue of who has standing to sue for false advertising under the Lanham Act. In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Scalia, the Court held that to...more

Stacy Allen Speaks: Looking Back 50 Years At 'N.Y. Times v Sullivan' and the Civil Rights Movement

I recently attended the annual ABA Forum on Communications Law, which included an informative panel discussion marking the 50th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in N.Y. Times v Sullivan. While we are...more

Courtney Love, Yelp and Internet libel: Nevermind, it’s not a trend

Courtney Love goes to trial, in a suit by her former attorney, based on a social media message that accused the attorney of being “bought off.” A Yelp user and the contractor she criticized go at each other in court over...more

195 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 8

Follow Communications & Media Updates on: