Phillips Domestic Applicances v. Braun and P&G, CV 07 CV 11290 (SDNY Dec 17 2007) (complaint on Pacer):
“Braun has been losing market share in the U.S. electric shaver business to Norelco – the brand owned by Phillips – for years . . . To reverse this trend, Braun and its new owner, P&G, needed to significantly refresh the Braun shaver line. But, because Defendants lacked any new true invention to offer consumers, Braun and P&G began to pretend that they did.” (Para 1, Complaint).
This is a false advertising case filed by Phillips in the SDNY yesterday concerning Braun’s advertising for its PULSONIC shaver. If Phillips allegations are correct, then a lot of comforting notions are going to fall away. For example, there’s no correlation between liquid rippling and skin rippling. Also, the presence of the ‘ripple’ in the skin, does not in fact depress the skin, thus exposing more hair. And, sadly, both the Pulsonic and the 360 Complete produce approximately 6 Pascals of acoustical pressure, not enough to create any sort of sonic effect.