skip to main | skip to sidebar

Rebecca Tushnet's 43(B)log

False advertising and more

Monday, December 03, 2012

FTC news

Via the Consumer Law & Policy blog, a news piece detailing the legacy of my esteemed colleague, David Vladeck, at the FTC.
Posted by Rebecca Tushnet at 6:57 AM
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Labels: consumer protection, ftc

No comments:

Post a Comment

Newer Post Older Post Home
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Rebecca Tushnet

Rebecca Tushnet
Rebecca Tushnet

ABA Blawg 100

ABA Blawg 100

Subscribe To

Posts
Atom
Posts
Comments
Atom
Comments

Subscribe via RSS

  • RSS 2.0
  • Atom

"Bright young [wo]man"/"Yo, who the F is this?"

  • Harvard Law School
  • Twitter (repost of blog)
  • My website
  • Email me

Blog Archive

  • ►  2022 (142)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  July (11)
    • ►  June (25)
    • ►  May (8)
    • ►  April (23)
    • ►  March (20)
    • ►  February (37)
    • ►  January (15)
  • ►  2021 (260)
    • ►  December (8)
    • ►  November (10)
    • ►  October (41)
    • ►  September (86)
    • ►  August (69)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (6)
    • ►  April (12)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (14)
    • ►  January (9)
  • ►  2020 (220)
    • ►  December (27)
    • ►  November (8)
    • ►  October (17)
    • ►  September (32)
    • ►  August (26)
    • ►  July (12)
    • ►  June (17)
    • ►  May (15)
    • ►  April (13)
    • ►  March (19)
    • ►  February (20)
    • ►  January (14)
  • ►  2019 (289)
    • ►  December (21)
    • ►  November (11)
    • ►  October (20)
    • ►  September (27)
    • ►  August (37)
    • ►  July (21)
    • ►  June (20)
    • ►  May (28)
    • ►  April (39)
    • ►  March (25)
    • ►  February (29)
    • ►  January (11)
  • ►  2018 (225)
    • ►  December (14)
    • ►  November (17)
    • ►  October (12)
    • ►  September (16)
    • ►  August (26)
    • ►  July (12)
    • ►  June (18)
    • ►  May (22)
    • ►  April (29)
    • ►  March (19)
    • ►  February (27)
    • ►  January (13)
  • ►  2017 (334)
    • ►  December (18)
    • ►  November (15)
    • ►  October (21)
    • ►  September (20)
    • ►  August (33)
    • ►  July (21)
    • ►  June (26)
    • ►  May (24)
    • ►  April (36)
    • ►  March (48)
    • ►  February (41)
    • ►  January (31)
  • ►  2016 (402)
    • ►  December (30)
    • ►  November (35)
    • ►  October (35)
    • ►  September (32)
    • ►  August (34)
    • ►  July (22)
    • ►  June (39)
    • ►  May (49)
    • ►  April (31)
    • ►  March (33)
    • ►  February (35)
    • ►  January (27)
  • ►  2015 (446)
    • ►  December (26)
    • ►  November (29)
    • ►  October (37)
    • ►  September (37)
    • ►  August (32)
    • ►  July (37)
    • ►  June (38)
    • ►  May (40)
    • ►  April (51)
    • ►  March (44)
    • ►  February (45)
    • ►  January (30)
  • ►  2014 (518)
    • ►  December (38)
    • ►  November (25)
    • ►  October (29)
    • ►  September (48)
    • ►  August (47)
    • ►  July (38)
    • ►  June (45)
    • ►  May (32)
    • ►  April (48)
    • ►  March (60)
    • ►  February (45)
    • ►  January (63)
  • ►  2013 (572)
    • ►  December (46)
    • ►  November (36)
    • ►  October (37)
    • ►  September (48)
    • ►  August (52)
    • ►  July (38)
    • ►  June (36)
    • ►  May (56)
    • ►  April (59)
    • ►  March (73)
    • ►  February (41)
    • ►  January (50)
  • ▼  2012 (598)
    • ▼  December (56)
      • Oh Ars Technica no
      • Barbie as famous works of art
      • Wells Fargo wins appeal on resequencing withdrawals
      • 230 doesn't yet bar suit against Apple over intrus...
      • No standing when defendant wore noncompeting hat e...
      • Studies show people like studies
      • Challenges to "natural"/"organic" labels survive m...
      • Casual empiricism replaces casual historicism
      • Reading List: The Late Age of Print
      • Not that this has ever happened to me
      • Merely alleging use for commercial purposes insuff...
      • The hazards of off-label promotion
      • One difference between marketers and trademark law...
      • Trademark question of the day
      • Bigger end of year news: copyright reform
      • End of year news
      • Transformation, commerce, and medium
      • I predict, therefore I am copyrightable
      • Transformative use of the day?
      • United States of Pop
      • Copying as speech redux
      • Caronia dissent points out FDCA's threatened found...
      • Prosecuting offlabel promotion as misbranding is u...
      • District court upholds strongly worded remedial ci...
      • wishy-washy "may enhance" health claim still actio...
      • Widespread use of Video Downloader doesn't save in...
      • Judge Rogers' dissent: image requirements are just...
      • Image-based required disclosures are unconstitutional
      • When ex parte situations conceal real legal issues
      • Reading list: the laws of image
      • No jury trial required on consumer protection claim
      • "natural" cooking oil claims mostly but not entire...
      • Anticompetitive suit leads to fees even if that ba...
      • ingredient whose alleged dangers aren't widely kno...
      • I'm dreaming of (a) white chocolate
      • Can firms advertise using names of inactive lawyers?
      • Copyright nonsense of the day
      • Natural versus organic: which claim is easier to m...
      • Importer/sales agent could be liable for false adv...
      • IPO PTO Day: Copyright infringement via patent app...
      • IPO PTO Day: design patents
      • IPO PTO Day: the new gTLDs and you
      • 4 decades of laches = permanent injunction
      • Copyright small claims court?
      • Beck, sheet music, and the nature of the musical work
      • Consumer surveys don't matter when the court is un...
      • Lanham Act claims don't require pleading with part...
      • Money damages require harm, but not consumer perce...
      • "All natural" class action partially certified
      • Today's transformative works
      • a label that says "sue me"
      • Press release distributed to patient groups is cov...
      • Pistachio bins as protectable marks
      • state TM infringement without distinctiveness?
      • FTC news
      • Problem of the day
    • ►  November (41)
    • ►  October (48)
    • ►  September (56)
    • ►  August (53)
    • ►  July (62)
    • ►  June (62)
    • ►  May (69)
    • ►  April (45)
    • ►  March (42)
    • ►  February (33)
    • ►  January (31)
  • ►  2011 (430)
    • ►  December (35)
    • ►  November (40)
    • ►  October (39)
    • ►  September (41)
    • ►  August (59)
    • ►  July (36)
    • ►  June (25)
    • ►  May (36)
    • ►  April (40)
    • ►  March (31)
    • ►  February (17)
    • ►  January (31)
  • ►  2010 (312)
    • ►  December (25)
    • ►  November (37)
    • ►  October (16)
    • ►  September (34)
    • ►  August (28)
    • ►  July (19)
    • ►  June (30)
    • ►  May (26)
    • ►  April (35)
    • ►  March (27)
    • ►  February (10)
    • ►  January (25)
  • ►  2009 (392)
    • ►  December (25)
    • ►  November (45)
    • ►  October (42)
    • ►  September (23)
    • ►  August (43)
    • ►  July (39)
    • ►  June (22)
    • ►  May (28)
    • ►  April (37)
    • ►  March (39)
    • ►  February (22)
    • ►  January (27)
  • ►  2008 (359)
    • ►  December (25)
    • ►  November (20)
    • ►  October (34)
    • ►  September (18)
    • ►  August (33)
    • ►  July (29)
    • ►  June (22)
    • ►  May (42)
    • ►  April (41)
    • ►  March (49)
    • ►  February (30)
    • ►  January (16)
  • ►  2007 (380)
    • ►  December (22)
    • ►  November (38)
    • ►  October (50)
    • ►  September (34)
    • ►  August (39)
    • ►  July (32)
    • ►  June (29)
    • ►  May (20)
    • ►  April (23)
    • ►  March (30)
    • ►  February (40)
    • ►  January (23)
  • ►  2006 (336)
    • ►  December (32)
    • ►  November (16)
    • ►  October (34)
    • ►  September (22)
    • ►  August (45)
    • ►  July (34)
    • ►  June (21)
    • ►  May (20)
    • ►  April (11)
    • ►  March (42)
    • ►  February (13)
    • ►  January (46)
  • ►  2005 (50)
    • ►  December (13)
    • ►  November (14)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (6)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2004 (14)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (9)
    • ►  October (2)
  • ►  2003 (9)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (5)

Labels

  • 1201 (16)
  • 230 (91)
  • acpa (15)
  • advertising (277)
  • antitrust (43)
  • arbitration (3)
  • art law (34)
  • attribution (28)
  • b (1)
  • blogging (23)
  • california (517)
  • can-spam (1)
  • cfaa (12)
  • cfps (38)
  • class actions (262)
  • cmi (16)
  • comics (37)
  • commercial speech (249)
  • conferences (856)
  • consumer protection (801)
  • contracts (94)
  • copying (193)
  • copyright (1564)
  • counterfeiting (1)
  • creative commons (12)
  • cultural property (10)
  • cybersquatting (1)
  • damages (146)
  • dastar (176)
  • defamation (188)
  • derivative works (2)
  • design patent (50)
  • dilution (254)
  • disclosures (85)
  • disparagement (26)
  • dmca (195)
  • drm (71)
  • evidence (1)
  • false advertising (2780)
  • false association (3)
  • false designation of origin (1)
  • false endorsement (10)
  • fan fiction (87)
  • fanworks (190)
  • fda (261)
  • fees (33)
  • first amendment (405)
  • ftc (172)
  • g (1)
  • geographic indications (39)
  • go (1)
  • google (89)
  • insurance (67)
  • interviews (5)
  • jobs (2)
  • jurisdiction (5)
  • libraries (18)
  • misappropriation (10)
  • moral rights (18)
  • music (131)
  • my lawsuits (16)
  • my writings (104)
  • net neutrality (5)
  • parody (27)
  • patent (210)
  • patents (132)
  • peer production (27)
  • preemption (253)
  • presentations (114)
  • privacy (111)
  • procedure (144)
  • property (17)
  • reading list (301)
  • remedies (246)
  • right of publicity (247)
  • secondary liability (172)
  • securities (8)
  • standing (328)
  • surveys (87)
  • teaching (30)
  • tortious interference (107)
  • trade secrets (77)
  • trademark (1907)
  • traditional knowledge (10)
  • unconscionability (5)
  • unfairness (59)
  • warranties (14)

Things I've read

Ad Links

  • FTC Business Center Blog
  • ABA's Private Advertising Litigation Committee
  • All About Ad Law (Venable)
  • Consumer Advertising Law Blog (Arnold & Porter)
  • Consumer Law & Policy Blog (Public Citizen)
  • E-Commerce & Tech Law Blog
  • The Commercial Closet
  • The Language of Advertising

Copyright Links

  • Books Online: No US Access
  • Columbia Law Library Music Plagiarism Archive
  • Copyright Litigation Blog
  • Copyright Termination Calculator
  • Current Copyright Legal Literature
  • Fairly Used: Stanford Fair Use Project
  • Illegal Art exhibit
  • Jessica Litman's Copyright Links
  • Keep Your Copyrights (Columbia U.)
  • Larry Lessig on Free Culture
  • Madisonian.net
  • Owners, Borrowers and Thieves
  • Political Remix Video
  • Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900)
  • Respect Copyrights (movie industry site)
  • The HP Lovecraft Library
  • Useful Arts.us

Trademark Links

  • Beauty Marks (Jessica Stone Levy)
  • Counterfeit Chic
  • Current Trademark Legal Literature
  • ICANN: Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy
  • Jessica Litman's Trademark Links
  • Las Vegas Trademark Attorney
  • Pattishall IP blog
  • Search UDRP Decisions
  • Seattle Trademark Lawyer
  • Technology & Marketing Law Blog
  • The Trademark Blog
  • The TTABlog
  • UDRPLaw Net

Other Links

  • xkcd
  • Rothman's Roadmap to the Right of Publicity
  • Balkinization
  • CAFA (Class Action Fairness Act) Law Blog
  • Confessions of an Aca/Fan: Henry Jenkins
  • Feminist Law Professors
  • History of Animation in Court
  • Jotwell: Journal of Things We Like Lots
  • Michigan Telecom & Tech Law Review blog
  • Online Fandom
  • Post or Perish (Online media legal issues)
  • PropertyProf Blog
  • Rocket Docket (EDVa IP Litigation)
  • The Gray Blog (parallel imports)
 

Creative Commons/disclaimer

Text on this blog is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License. Pictures and works quoted may be subject to other parties' copyrights. I speak for myself. On this blog, I do not and cannot speak for Harvard Law School, the Organization for Transformative Works and/or AO3.