The First Amendment Protects the Marketing Term “Vegan Butter”–Miyoko’s v. Ross
I have been a vegetarian for 35+ years. Over the past 15+ years, I have shifted towards being vegan. I eat virtually 100% vegan in the home and always prefer vegan options when they are available. My embrace of veganism…
Section 230 Protects Craigslist from Sex Trafficking Claims, Despite FOSTA–JB v. Craigslist
This is an important early judicial interpretation of FOSTA. The court reaches several key conclusions, including that Section 230(c)(1) still preempts state civil claims and Craigslist did not “participate in a venture” with every advertiser of commercial sex. If this…
Three Keyword Advertising Decisions in a Week, and the Trademark Owners Lost Them All
If you are a trademark owner suing over competitive keyword ads, you are almost certainly making a bad business decision, and your attorney might be milking your bank account. If you are an attorney representing a trademark owner in a…
Google Defeats Account Termination Case on Section 230 Grounds (Mostly)–Enhanced Athlete v. YouTube
This is another account termination case. The plaintiff ran two YouTube channels with 145k subscribers. The opinion implies that the channels hyped a steroid-like supplement not approved by the FDA (“SARMS”). As usual with cases in this genre, the plaintiff…
Announcing the Fifth Edition of Advertising & Marketing Law: Cases & Materials by Tushnet & Goldman
Rebecca Tushnet and I are pleased to announce the fifth edition of our casebook, Advertising & Marketing Law: Cases & Materials. It is available for purchase in the following formats: * A DRM-free PDF file. Price: $12 * In Kindle. Price: $9.99…
IAP Defeats Vicarious Copyright Infringement Claim–UMG v. Bright House
In a good ruling for Internet access providers (IAPs), a court said that the IAP Bright House wasn’t vicariously liable for its users’ copyright infringing activity because the IAP lacked a direct financial benefit. The court says that the legal…
Unhappy Google Advertiser’s Lawsuit Completely Falls Apart–Dreamstime v. Google
This is one of several lawsuits by unhappy Google advertisers, each claiming that Google screwed them out of Google’s self-interest. (A reminder that advertisers always feel screwed because they believe they deserve more customers for less money). Anti-Google lawsuits tend…
Fox News Is a Flaming Pile of Garbage, But You Can’t Sue Them for That–WASHLITE v. Fox News
I can’t understand why anyone watches Fox News. Fox News isn’t a serious news organization. It has instead found a market niche for unwavering partisan disinformation. As Prof. Yochai Benkler (Harvard Law) showed in a comprehensive study of disinformation in…
Section 230 Applies to Publicity Rights Claim–Hepp v. Facebook
Karen Hepp is a TV show host on the Fox 29 channel in Philadelphia. (No “Karen” jokes, please). She claims that “a photograph of her taken by a security camera in a convenience store in New York City was being…
Section 230 Ends Demonetized YouTuber’s Lawsuit–Lewis v. Google
Lewis ran a YouTube channel called “Misandry Today.” Misandry is hatred of men, like misogyny but with reversed genders. I didn’t look at Lewis’ content but I worry that its examples of alleged misandry actually might be presented to advance…