2023 Quick Links: Leftovers

Consumer Reviews * Route App, Inc. v. Heuberger, 2023 WL 5334192 (D. Utah Aug. 18, 2023): Heuberger argues that Route’s Breach of Contract claim fails because the non-disparagement provision in the Terms is unenforceable under the Consumer Review Fairness Act (“CRFA”)…

2023 Internet Law Year-in-Review

2023 Internet Law Year-in-Review

My roundup of the top Internet Law developments of 2023: 10) California court bans targeted advertising (?). Regulators have sought to suppress online targeted advertising for years, with only minimal success. Then, in Liapes v. Facebook, a California appeals court…

Web Page Framing Isn't Trespass to Chattels--Best Carpet Values v. Google

Web Page Framing Isn’t Trespass to Chattels–Best Carpet Values v. Google

This case is an old-school turn-of-the-century throwback (and not the good kind). Google’s search app framed the web pages users visit, and the frame included ads. Some screenshots depicting the framing (the first image shows Google’s superimposed frame on the…

Internal Search Results Aren't Trademark Infringing--PEM v. Peninsula

Internal Search Results Aren’t Trademark Infringing–PEM v. Peninsula

This is a case involving a trademark owner and a competitive keyword advertiser. The trademark owner memorably (and ridiculously) characterized the rival as engaging in “keyword conquesting,” a term I encourage you never to use. The court already sent that…

2023 Quick Links: IP, Keyword Ads

* For over a decade, I’ve implored people to stop using the term “Soft IP.” Amanda Levendowski now provides another reason: the term has problematic gender implications. * After II Movie, LLC v. Grande Communications Networks, LLC, 2023 WL 1422808…

Advertiser Can't Force Facebook to Run Sex Product Ads--Strachan v. Facebook

Advertiser Can’t Force Facebook to Run Sex Product Ads–Strachan v. Facebook

Strachan created various Facebook pages and an advertising account. “In April 2020, Facebook cancelled Strachan’s advertising account and removed his advertising content from the platform.” Allegedly, Facebook “determined he was selling ‘Adult Services and/or Products,’ i.e., ‘sex products.’” To make…

Section 230 Helps Amazon Defeat False Advertising Lawsuit Over Printer Ink Cartridges--Planet Green v. Amazon

Section 230 Helps Amazon Defeat False Advertising Lawsuit Over Printer Ink Cartridges–Planet Green v. Amazon

The plaintiff sells remanufactured printer ink cartridges. The plaintiff claims that Amazon listings falsely claim that other merchants’ cartridges are “remanufactured” or “recycled.” For reasons unclear to me, the plaintiff thought it would be a good idea to sue Amazon…

Section 230 Protects Gmail's Spam Filter--RNC v. Google

Section 230 Protects Gmail’s Spam Filter–RNC v. Google

[My blogging queue has gotten backlogged. I’m slowly catching up. I hope you enjoy these 2,800 words on legal topics you assumed were definitively resolved over a dozen years ago.] Introduction This lawsuit is one of the many lawsuits around…

Does California's Anti-Discrimination Law Ban Ad Targeting?--Liapes v. Facebook

Does California’s Anti-Discrimination Law Ban Ad Targeting?–Liapes v. Facebook

This opinion indicates that Facebook–and by implication, every other ad network–could violate California’s Unruh Act (an anti-discrimination law) by targeting third-party ads based on age, gender, or other protected criteria. The court reaches this shocking conclusion by cutting several analytical…

When Do Inbound Call Logs Show Consumer Confusion?--Adler v McNeil

When Do Inbound Call Logs Show Consumer Confusion?–Adler v McNeil

This case involves Jim Adler, a/k/a the “Texas Hammer,” a Texas lawyer who has spent $100M+ on advertising to build his brand. The defendants run a call-center service that attracts prospective legal clients and then makes compensated referrals of the…