<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>The Lustigman Firm, P.C. Attorneys</title>
    <link>http://www.promotionlawblog.com</link>
    <description />
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 5 Feb 2010 06:02:29 -0800</pubDate>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <item>
      <title>Lustigman to Speak at the American Bar Association's 25th Annual Intellectual Property Law Conference</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;On April 8, 2010, Andrew Lustigman will Speak at the American Bar Association&amp;#39;s 25th Annual Intellectual Property Law Conference: &amp;quot;Texting, Toggling, Tagging, Tweeting: Copyright, Trademark and Advertising in New Media&amp;quot; in Arlington, VA .&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Online and social media are increasingly popular with marketers who want to take advantage of new technology, viral marketing and word of mouth exposure. As these new marketing channels are exploited, new legal concerns arise both from copyright and trademark perspectives.This program will include demonstrations of new technologies and discussion of their impact on copyright law, while also considering the unauthorized use of trademarks on social media sites.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;For Details on the ABA&amp;#39;s 25th Annual Intellectual Property Law Conference, click &lt;span style="color: #1f497d"&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.abanet.org/intelprop/spring2010/schedule10.shtml"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.promotionlawblog.com/tp-060814075835/post-100205065301.shtml</link>
      <guid>http://www.promotionlawblog.com/tp-060814075835/post-100205065301.shtml</guid>
      <category>Lustigman Firm News</category>
      <pubDate>Fri, 5 Feb 2010 06:53:01 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>New IAB/4As Standard Terms Published</title>
      <description>The Interactive Advertising Bureau and 4As recently published the latest version of their Standard Terms and Conditions for Internet Advertising. What are they, and how can they be used?</description>
      <link>http://www.promotionlawblog.com/tp-060526092755/post-100204175716.shtml</link>
      <guid>http://www.promotionlawblog.com/tp-060526092755/post-100204175716.shtml</guid>
      <category>Marketing and Advertising Law</category>
      <pubDate>Thu, 4 Feb 2010 17:57:16 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Appellate Court Upholds Verdict Against Company President in False Advertising Suit Regarding Fruit Juice</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;A distributor of pure pomegranate juice sued a competitor company and its president under the Lanham Act and California&amp;#39;s false advertising and unfair trade practices statutes alleging that ads which claimed their juice was &amp;quot;100%&amp;quot; pure pomegranate juice with &amp;quot;no sugar added&amp;quot; were false, and the defendants knew or should have known that they were not true.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.promotionlawblog.com/tp-060526092755/post-100204140429.shtml</link>
      <guid>http://www.promotionlawblog.com/tp-060526092755/post-100204140429.shtml</guid>
      <category>Marketing and Advertising Law</category>
      <pubDate>Thu, 4 Feb 2010 14:04:29 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Truth Is Not Always Enough</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;When it comes to the rules of advertising, many remain confused by the legal doctrine that while a statement can be literally true, it still can be considered false or deceptive. Three advertisers learned recently this lesson the hard way in the last few weeks when the &lt;a href="http://www.nadreview.org/"&gt;National Advertising Division&lt;/a&gt; of the Better Business Bureau (NAD) recommended that certain of their marketing claims, while literally true, should be discontinued.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.promotionlawblog.com/tp-060526092755/post-100204123533.shtml</link>
      <guid>http://www.promotionlawblog.com/tp-060526092755/post-100204123533.shtml</guid>
      <category>Marketing and Advertising Law</category>
      <pubDate>Thu, 4 Feb 2010 12:35:33 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Proposed Legislation Threatens Legitimate Suppliers and Media Businesses</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Many marketers may be in favor of the proposed &lt;a href="http://www.consumerfinancelitigation.com/uploads/file/111_hr_finsrv_4173_full.pdf"&gt;Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009&lt;/a&gt;(H.R. 4173) recently passed by the House in December 2009 and currently before the Senate because the bill seeks to address elements which caused the current financial crisis. Unfortunately, the devil is in the details. The proposed legislation is purportedly intended to provide for financial regulatory reform, to protect consumers and investors, to enhance Federal understanding of insurance issues, to regulate the over-the-counter derivatives markets. However, hidden within the proposed legislation is the &amp;quot;Improvements to the Federal Trade Commission Act&amp;quot; and other provisions that would significantly expand the authority of the Federal Trade Com&amp;shy;mission (FTC) beyond the massive powers the agency already possesses. These proposed changes will place legitimate marketers, suppliers, and media businesses in an even more precarious position. Indeed, the DMA has gone so far as to call the proposed enhancements &amp;quot;The FTC on steroids.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.promotionlawblog.com/tp-060526092755/post-100204112745.shtml</link>
      <guid>http://www.promotionlawblog.com/tp-060526092755/post-100204112745.shtml</guid>
      <category>Marketing and Advertising Law</category>
      <pubDate>Thu, 4 Feb 2010 11:27:45 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

