skip to main | skip to sidebar

Rebecca Tushnet's 43(B)log

False advertising and more

Friday, June 21, 2013

Rolling Stone writes about fraud and puffery

Matt Taibbi on puffery, fraud, and whether ratings agencies can defend their "integrity" while also claiming that it was dumb for any investor to have relied on them.  (Then what are the ratings for?)
Posted by Rebecca Tushnet at 1:51 PM
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Labels: false advertising

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

Follow by Email

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

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

Blog Archive

  • ►  2021 (44)
    • ►  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)
      • Transformative work of the day
      • Disputed scientific conclusions not actionable und...
      • Sauce for goose isn't (chocolate) sauce for gander...
      • Voluntary change entitles California plaintiff to ...
      • HP's power and performance claims were mere puffery
      • Giant sucking sound: vacuum claims false
      • Grab bag of food claims survives preemption, not R...
      • "Fan use" or fair use?
      • Descriptive or nominative?
      • Revenge is tweet
      • New book chapter on Barbie and IP exceptions
      • Rolling Stone writes about fraud and puffery
      • Sharing v. stealing
      • Disparagement?
      • NY consumer protection standing exists when decept...
      • No preliminary injunction in consumer class action
      • back pocket logo as "title" for advertising injury...
      • NYT on FTC case against internet marketer
      • Typicality defeats a food class action
      • Copyright in real estate listings survives Lanham ...
      • Court misapplies Dastar because customers buy phot...
      • Long, unhappy post on Hart v. EA
      • Cute rephrasing of Prince v. Cariou
      • #sincere? Slate on sponsored tweets and disclosure
      • What does it take to plead bad faith assertion of ...
      • Second Circuit makes descriptive fair use more con...
      • Remotely hosted images can't provide clear and con...
      • FDA warning letter doesn't trigger primary jurisdi...
      • UK's Advertising Standards Authority on misleading...
      • New commercial speech lawsuit on disclosure wording
      • His hair was perfect: werewolf erotica and images ...
      • Heaven knows I'm Morrissey now
      • There goes my summer: Lanham Act standing case get...
      • Washington Metro goes after parody dating site
      • Reading list: user-generated content in Canada
      • Another story on cover songs as misleading
    • ►  May (56)
    • ►  April (59)
    • ►  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 (15)
  • 230 (87)
  • acpa (15)
  • advertising (274)
  • antitrust (37)
  • arbitration (2)
  • art law (33)
  • attribution (28)
  • b (1)
  • blogging (23)
  • california (479)
  • can-spam (1)
  • cfaa (12)
  • cfps (34)
  • class actions (251)
  • cmi (14)
  • comics (37)
  • commercial speech (235)
  • conferences (836)
  • consumer protection (689)
  • contracts (91)
  • copying (192)
  • copyright (1535)
  • counterfeiting (1)
  • creative commons (12)
  • cultural property (10)
  • cybersquatting (1)
  • damages (137)
  • dastar (167)
  • defamation (181)
  • derivative works (2)
  • design patent (48)
  • dilution (250)
  • disclosures (77)
  • disparagement (21)
  • dmca (192)
  • drm (71)
  • evidence (1)
  • false advertising (2529)
  • fan fiction (87)
  • fanworks (190)
  • fda (250)
  • fees (31)
  • first amendment (391)
  • ftc (168)
  • g (1)
  • geographic indications (35)
  • go (1)
  • google (88)
  • insurance (63)
  • interviews (5)
  • jobs (2)
  • jurisdiction (5)
  • libraries (18)
  • misappropriation (10)
  • moral rights (16)
  • music (130)
  • my lawsuits (16)
  • my writings (99)
  • net neutrality (5)
  • parody (27)
  • patent (203)
  • patents (131)
  • peer production (27)
  • preemption (243)
  • presentations (109)
  • privacy (106)
  • procedure (143)
  • property (17)
  • reading list (293)
  • remedies (212)
  • right of publicity (233)
  • secondary liability (160)
  • securities (7)
  • standing (305)
  • surveys (73)
  • teaching (28)
  • tortious interference (96)
  • trade secrets (74)
  • trademark (1817)
  • traditional knowledge (9)
  • unconscionability (5)
  • unfairness (54)
  • warranties (12)

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.