You can’t say Pom’s owners aren’t willing to pick a fight
(or a fruit or nut).
Also via Zach Schrag.
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
-
▼
2014
(518)
-
▼
January
(63)
- Sony data breach case stripped down but not gone
- Digital Copyright book: discount offer from publisher
- Harvard Law Review Symposium on Freedom of the Press
- News for storage jars: the real scandal in Virgini...
- 9th Circuit makes trademark fair use even more con...
- Strict liability for misleading advertising in Europe
- Nontransformative, commercial use of earnings call...
- UK Court of Appeals rejects survey evidence in TM ...
- House fair use hearing
- Fair use hearing testimony available
- TM claims in DMCA notice may lead to 512(f) liability
- Mastercard v. Nader updated
- Congressional hearing on the scope of fair use
- unfair competition in the news
- Organization for Transformative Works gets a Hugo ...
- FTC goes after advertiser and ad agency for false ...
- Reading list: Without Copyrights
- false omission claim fails for insufficiently alle...
- Innovation and inequality
- Second Circuit allows one mandatory pregnancy cent...
- changing goodwill signalled by mark isn't infringe...
- No records, no class action against Chipotle
- falsely claiming continued TM ownership leads to l...
- Product placement labeled news attracts NAD's cond...
- Reading list: Fagundes on market harm in the fair ...
- there's no transformation but what we make for our...
- World Without Privacy Wrapup
- World Without Privacy 4
- World Without Privacy 3
- OTW participates in Copyright Week
- A world without privacy 2
- A World Without Privacy?
- Transformative work of the day
- "stable," "traditional" and "family-based" are puf...
- economic loss doctrine doesn't appply to consumer ...
- court rules that Pom Wonderful precludes claims th...
- trademark licensing and apparent agency
- Congressional hearing on the scope of copyright pr...
- FDA declines to define "natural," again
- qualitative statements about insurance policies we...
- keyword purchase supports unfair competition verdict
- time to shell out for an IP lawyer
- Hedging and bullying in trademark
- Cert granted in Pom Wonderful v. Coca-Cola
- Trademark strategy question of the day
- Inability to determine who bought what dooms class...
- New piece: Henry Jenkins and fair use
- Olympic rectangles?
- Appropriation art and sf book covers
- Oracle suit against third party claiming to provid...
- the trademark joke is a tricky beast
- Bumble Bee pushes the envelope, finds lawsuit inside
- advertising law exam in 140 characters or less
- Guest post: Betsy Rosenblatt on the case of Sherlo...
- The Cadillac of nominative fair use questions
- Transformative work of the day
- is political use of 9/11 images fair use?
- a tasty copyright analogy
- News for storage jars containing sugar
- possible profit recovery means TM case continues
- "Natural" is too vague to be false advertising
- Claims relating to organic content completely pree...
- Sleep Number no more: false advertising but not TM...
-
▼
January
(63)
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