skip to main
|
skip to sidebar
Rebecca Tushnet's 43(B)log
False advertising and more
Monday, July 13, 2015
Amicus seeking rehearing in In re GNC
Brian Wolfman and I just filed this
amicus on behalf of law professors
seeking rehearing in the
In re GNC case, which badly misunderstood literal falsity
.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Newer Post
Older Post
Home
View mobile version
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Rebecca Tushnet
Rebecca Tushnet
Email subscription
Subscribe
*
indicates required
Email Address
*
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)
No silver bullet for innovator in bullion market
Amicus supporting rehearing in MTM v. Amazon
Limiting remedies when a descriptive fair use defe...
Transformative use of the day, Lululemon edition
Somehow the Coke bottle survived this dilutive fre...
4th Circuit denies rehearing in In re GNC
ISHTIP at Penn, part 9
ISHTIP at Penn, part 8
ISHTIP at Penn, Part 7
ISHTIP at Penn, part 6
Washington Post explains how the DMCA will kill yo...
ISHTIP at Penn, Part 5
ISHTIP at Penn, part 4
Claims about computer expertise aren't puffery to ...
ISHTIP at Penn, part 3
ISHTIP at Penn, part 2
ISHTIP at Penn, part 1
Uber's safety claims not all puffery
BBB claims about its own ratings process not prote...
First Circuit lifts injunction requiring D's use o...
Transformative work of the day, Miss Piggy edition
What claims work when D allegedly drives P down in...
New fair use app from New Media Rights
Transformative work of the day, Bryan Adams edition
CD Cal rejects In re GNC for all the right reasons
False establishment claims not actionable under co...
Dastar-barred claims can't be repled as false adve...
Is it awful of me to want a Downfall remix featuri...
Quote of the day: on trademark harm
Amicus seeking rehearing in In re GNC
And his fate is still unlearn’d: Subway overcharge...
A rant on the Copyright Office's Orphan Works prop...
Reading list: Christine Jolls on visual disclosures
Exaggerated and outdated photos literally false, c...
Venable on notable NAD product name ruling
Clearblue's pregnancy test gets the blues: recall ...
UK ad regulator disapproves of negative puffery
►
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)
►
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
My Library
at
LibraryThing
No comments:
Post a Comment