New Developments in the World of Section 230
Podcast - Developments in FDA & DOJ Regulation and Enforcement of Manufacturer Communications
On February 25, 2021, the United States District Court for the District of Kansas issued an opinion granting summary judgment in favor of CardX, LLC (CardX), and found unconstitutional “a Kansas law that prohibits sellers...more
This sixth edition of Unprecedented, our weekly update on COVID-19 litigation, sees us reporting on many of the same types of cases. Consumers continue to seek refunds for goods and services that have been disrupted by the...more
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld a District Court’s decision to strike down a state law that placed severe restrictions on alcohol advertising. For example, under the law, Joe’s Bar could run the ad, “Drink...more
First Amendment challenges to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) are in the midst of a revival. The TCPA makes it unlawful to call or text a cell phone using an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS) or...more
The New York Court of Appeals has issued an opinion in Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman interpreting the state’s law that prohibits merchants from imposing a surcharge on credit card purchases (Section 518 of the...more
Now we’re talking! As I’ve written on multiple occasions, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) is the broadest restriction on constitutionally protected speech in our nation’s history. Worse still, the statute is...more
Two incredible things happened in 1992 for the NFL football team Washington Redskins. It won the Super Bowl and applied to register a trademark Washington Redskins. It has not been so lucky ever since. It has not won another...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Dyk, Moore, and Stoll. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The bar in § 2(a) of the Lanham Act against registering immoral or scandalous trademarks is an...more
• The Federal Circuit held that the “immoral or scandalous” clause of Lanham Act § 2(a), which prohibits registration of a trademark that “consists of or comprises immoral or scandalous matter,” is unconstitutional under the...more
The Asian American members of the band the Slants adopted that name to “reclaim” and “take ownership” of the derogatory term. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) refused to register a trademark application...more
Well, that happened! According to the Supreme Court’s opinion in Matal v. Tam, Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, which purports to prohibit the registration of marks that “disparage . . . persons,” is unconstitutional. ...more
This week, the U.S. Supreme Court emphasized the importance of broad free speech protection in striking down a statute that allows the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to refuse registration of disparaging trademarks....more