MetNews.com: Court Upholds Dismiss of Suit Over Lawyer’s Advertising
A libel action by a manufacturer against an attorney who published a newspaper advertisement stating that users of that manufacturer’s product “may” have claims to relief constituted a strategic lawsuit against public participation, the Sixth District Court of Appeal has held.
AdAge: “UK Cracks Down on Word-of-Mouth With Tough Restrictions“:
Word-of-mouth marketing in the U.K. will face radical restrictions starting May 26, when it will become a criminal offense for brands to seed positive messages online without making the origin of the message clear.
43(B)log: The Meaning Of “Commemorative Baseball Bat:
Plaintiff (d/b/a Where It All Began) alleged that defendant (d/b/a Cooperstown Bat Co.) engaged in false advertising of its commemorative baseball bats in Cooperstown, falsely claiming to “manufacture” and “make” baseball bats and to make them in Cooperstown (“where it all began”), when in fact the bats
Taser published quotes from a study about its competitor, Stinger, that Stinger alleges are false or misleading. Excerpt from complaint: “Taser’s conduct evidences an evil hand guided by an evil mind and outstrip the bounds of decency, fairness, and fair competition.”
Fortune: “Apple Settles “Millions of Colors” Lawsuit”:
When you’re a company as high profile and as rich as Apple, you get sued for a lot things, from patent infringement (eight cases since January alone, according to Barron’s) to “sexual harassments with Apple gadgets” (see here). But one suit that was widely derided as frivolous
North American sub of Software AG enters into contract with US corporation and its Brazilian agent to provide support in Brazil for Software AG’s Brazilian customers. There was a dispute and the contract was terminated, leaving the Brazilian agent exposed in its support commitments. The Brazilian agent then made statements in Brazil to its customers
43(B)log: “False Claims To Retailers Violate Lanham Act”
“The current case concerned allegedly false claims that the Dyson model DC18 doesn’t lose suction and that it is the “most powerful lightweight” vacuum cleaner. This suit was filed four months after an earlier false advertising suit was settled and dismissed with prejudice. . . .
Airborne Herbal Supplement has annual sales of $300 mil., is apparently not a miracle cold-buster but is “an overpriced, run-of-the-mill vitamin pill that’s been cleverly, but deceptively, marketed,” according to lead plaintiff in a suit that has resulted in a settlement under which Airborne will pay a $23.3 mil. settlement, including refunds to purchasers of
NY Times: “Can A Sandwich Be Slandered?”
Quiznos, the toasted-sandwich chain, [invited] the public to submit homemade commercials in a contest intended to attack a top rival, Subway. The contest rules made it clear that the videos should depict Quiznos sandwiches as “superior” to Subway’s.
Subway promptly sued Quiznos and iFilm, the Web