Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Rebecca Tushnet
False advertising and more
Rebecca Tushnet
Rebecca Tushnet
Email subscription
ABA Blawg 100
Posts
Subscribe via RSS or LinkedIn
"Bright young [wo]man"/"Yo, who the F is this?"
Blog Archive
-
▼
2013
(572)
-
▼
September
(48)
- it's ok to assume that cybersquatting caused damage
- No reasonable person could believe it's just butter
- another fruit seller sued for selling preserved fr...
- Website footer still isn't CMI; short phrases stil...
- PTO empirical data: US and UK
- PTO empirical data, TM applications
- PTO empirical workshop, keyword buys
- USPTO Workshop on Empirical Studies of Trademark Data
- Georgetown Law is hiring clinical faculty in IP/te...
- Copyright question of the day
- NY cracks down on fake reviews
- Design patent, not so comfy
- "Grand Total" isn't deceptive when additional char...
- Welcome to Night Vale: the gift that keeps on givi...
- multiple ingredients defeat consumer's supplement ...
- technical regulatory violations could plausibly de...
- branding via employee appearance isn't commercial ...
- Transformative work of the day, Old Spice edition
- sampling as political speech
- Eric Goldman on self-publishing our Advertising La...
- It's not about the drugs: Lance Armstrong lawsuit ...
- Sir Robin Jacob's new edition of Guidebook to IP
- lawyer lacks Article III standing against ADR prov...
- It's not butter, it's Parkay ... but maybe the but...
- Fandom and traditional knowledge as limited common...
- Health and nutrition claims for the under-2 set dr...
- Nonpatented product was functional even though alt...
- Monster beverages, monster puffery
- media interviews weren't commercial speech for Lan...
- But I said, what about international copyright law?
- UK's ASA approves "all the latest phones" as puffery
- yarn country of origin claims get a chance to unroll
- Private Copyright Reform
- "All natural" claims against Frito-Lay survive
- No standing to bring claims based on ads, only on ...
- Who owns the trademark?
- some consumers' indifference to ad claim dooms cla...
- Home Depot employees know too little to be its agents
- different business lines make confusion unlikely a...
- Radio station's past results no guarantee of futur...
- Neither copyright nor trademark confer rights in t...
- Copyright Office fellowships; Prof. Brauneis appoi...
- What does "Made in the USA" mean?
- existence of scientific debate doesn't take claim ...
- Does "Made in Germany" mean anything?
- UK ASA approves tweet using @ instead of #ad
- Patentee lacks Lanham Act standing against manufac...
- 10-year blog anniversary
-
▼
September
(48)
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment