skip to main | skip to sidebar

Rebecca Tushnet's 43(B)log

False advertising and more

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

reading list: FTC guidelines for fitness claims?

Heather M. Mandelkehr, When toning shoes strengthen nothing more than likelihood of lawsuit: why the Federal Trade Commission needs guidelines regarding proper substantiation of fitness advertisements, 20 Jeffrey S. Moorad Sports L.J. 297-346 (2013).
Posted by Rebecca Tushnet at 12:31 PM
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Labels: consumer protection, false advertising, ftc, reading list

No comments:

Post a Comment

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

Rebecca Tushnet

Rebecca Tushnet
Rebecca Tushnet

Email subscription

Subscribe

* indicates required

ABA Blawg 100

ABA Blawg 100

Subscribe To

Posts
Atom
Posts
Comments
Atom
Comments

Subscribe via RSS or LinkedIn

  • Atom
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS 2.0
  • Use If This Than That (recommended but needs setup)

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

  • Harvard Law School
  • Mastodon (mostly repost of blog)
  • My website
  • Email me
  • Bluesky

Blog Archive

  • ►  2024 (155)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (16)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  August (23)
    • ►  July (17)
    • ►  June (7)
    • ►  May (6)
    • ►  April (13)
    • ►  March (18)
    • ►  February (28)
    • ►  January (19)
  • ►  2023 (243)
    • ►  December (15)
    • ►  November (13)
    • ►  October (17)
    • ►  September (19)
    • ►  August (16)
    • ►  July (18)
    • ►  June (22)
    • ►  May (18)
    • ►  April (26)
    • ►  March (32)
    • ►  February (24)
    • ►  January (23)
  • ►  2022 (223)
    • ►  December (30)
    • ►  November (12)
    • ►  October (11)
    • ►  September (12)
    • ►  August (19)
    • ►  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)
      • Case against junk foreclosure fees survives for now
      • When fraudulent concealment is easier to plead tha...
      • NY rejects another law school consumer protection ...
      • Some incisive commentary on Prince v. Cariou
      • Sharp dealing isn't common law fraud, can violate ...
      • Defamatory statements justify Lanham Act fee award
      • damages expert excluded for failing to discredit c...
      • failure to adhere to government and industry label...
      • Consumer Class Actions panel at the ABA
      • Transformativeness doesn't require commentary on o...
      • no preemption for ordinary falsity claim about FDA...
      • Prince v. Cariou
      • Pictures of fruit support misleadingness claim for...
      • reading list: FTC guidelines for fitness claims?
      • FDLI conference: top cases
      • supplier's state can exercise personal jurisdictio...
      • Vegan alternative has standing against foie gras p...
      • lack of substantiation not actionable by consumers
      • The MPAA is trying to kill a treaty for the blind ...
      • Failure to disclose gelatin not actionable despite...
      • The test bubble meets the (r)
      • claims against allegedly misleading law school emp...
      • Chocolate pain: Ghirardelli case continues for one...
      • Contributory liability for distributor's alleged k...
      • Google knows I like ad mishaps!
      • Claims defendant promises not to repeat won't caus...
      • Copyright bullying, university edition
      • Hearing from Dodge's lawyers?
      • Wide range of expert testimony admissible in Lanha...
      • Alleged misrepresentations in foreclosure complain...
      • Mortgage-related claim survives preemption, for now
      • "All Natural" and other claims survive preemption ...
      • "All natural" class decertified for failure to pro...
      • Trademark Scholars' Roundtable, part 3
      • Trademark Scholars' Roundtable part 2 continued
      • Trademark Scholars' Roundtable part 2
      • TM roundtable, continued
      • 5th Annual Trademark Scholars' Roundtable
      • Q&A on new Canadian copyright law
      • Navajo Nation claims against Urban Outfitters survive
      • CLS and IP part 3
      • CLS and IP part 2
      • Critical Legal Studies and Intellectual Property a...
      • Rack and ruin: search queries no aid to Nordstrom
      • Claims over allegedly inhumanely raised chickens s...
      • Unusual copyright permission term leads to unsucce...
      • Support the Organization for Transformative Works
      • Square pegs on round spots: transformative alterat...
      • Tom Friedman Op-ed Generator
      • Lace pattern not infringing, but possibly bait & s...
      • Court mostly rejects Dole's fruit salad of argumen...
      • Design patent regime preempts state law claims for...
      • Timeline of bad facts
      • Reading list: empirical study of college football ...
      • Proposition 64 didn't remove standing from competi...
      • $42 million in damages available for violation of ...
      • System design alone not enough for copyright liabi...
      • Del Monte trademark, false advertising battle ends...
      • Green is good?
    • ►  March (73)
    • ►  February (41)
    • ►  January (50)
  • ►  2012 (598)
    • ►  December (56)
    • ►  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 (19)
  • 1202 (2)
  • 230 (96)
  • acpa (16)
  • advertising (283)
  • antitrust (49)
  • arbitration (3)
  • art law (36)
  • attribution (28)
  • b (1)
  • blogging (23)
  • california (536)
  • can-spam (1)
  • cfaa (12)
  • cfps (48)
  • class actions (277)
  • cmi (19)
  • comics (37)
  • commercial speech (269)
  • conferences (917)
  • consumer protection (946)
  • content moderation (3)
  • contracts (100)
  • copying (195)
  • copyright (1653)
  • counterfeiting (1)
  • creative commons (12)
  • cultural property (10)
  • cybersquatting (1)
  • damages (159)
  • dastar (196)
  • defamation (202)
  • derivative works (2)
  • design patent (57)
  • dilution (257)
  • disclosures (95)
  • disparagement (29)
  • dmca (202)
  • drm (72)
  • evidence (1)
  • false advertising (3075)
  • false association (12)
  • false designation of origin (6)
  • false endorsement (13)
  • fan fiction (87)
  • fanworks (190)
  • fda (273)
  • fees (35)
  • first amendment (442)
  • ftc (184)
  • g (1)
  • geographic indications (43)
  • go (1)
  • google (89)
  • insurance (72)
  • interviews (5)
  • jobs (2)
  • jurisdiction (5)
  • libraries (18)
  • misappropriation (10)
  • moral rights (18)
  • music (136)
  • my lawsuits (16)
  • my writings (113)
  • net neutrality (5)
  • parody (27)
  • patent (224)
  • patents (136)
  • peer production (27)
  • preclusion (1)
  • preemption (268)
  • presentations (118)
  • privacy (113)
  • procedure (145)
  • property (18)
  • reading list (307)
  • remedies (275)
  • right of publicity (263)
  • secondary liability (178)
  • securities (8)
  • standing (354)
  • surveys (106)
  • teaching (38)
  • tortious interference (114)
  • trade secrets (81)
  • trademark (2040)
  • traditional knowledge (11)
  • unconscionability (5)
  • unfairness (62)
  • warranties (14)

Things I've read

 

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.