In responding to the unprecedented COVID-19 challenges, companies around the world are rushing to capitalize on the current crisis by advertising the effectiveness of their products in containing the virus spread. Among these ads and messages, some may be useful in building the public’s confidence and marketing effective products to consumers, but some may mislead and deceive desperate consumers into buying treatments and products without any scientific support. As fear and anxiety proliferate during this pandemic, fraudulent or false advertisements also surge and explode. Petitioners raise false advertising claims and try to stop misleading advertisements by seeking injunctions. However, the injunction standard in the false advertising context is still the subject of debate.
Business
- Mossoff-Barnett Comment on EU Commission’s Call for SEP Evidence Spotlights Misconceptions About FRAND Obligations
- Misusing March-in Rights for Price Control: A Dagger to the Heart of Small Companies
- Examining the Circuit Split on Preliminary Injunctions in False Advertising Post-eBay
- USPTO Tasked with Promoting Inclusive Innovation, Improving Prior Art Search Tools Under Commerce Strategic Plan
- It’s Time for NIH to Uphold the Law, Once Again
Recent Posts
- CAFC Gives Google Second Shot at PTAB in Challenge of Communications Patents
- Policy Shift Against SEP Rights Poses Risks for U.S. Innovation and Undermines Mandate of the ITC
- Mossoff-Barnett Comment on EU Commission’s Call for SEP Evidence Spotlights Misconceptions About FRAND Obligations
- LG’s Recent Infringement Fight Against TCL Could Take Some Tips from DivX’s Approach
- A Tale of Two Googles: Patent System Champion or Crux of the Problem?