Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 15 DECEMBER 2009

Advertising Puffery?

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Contributor
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP is one of the world’s largest firms focusing on...

View firm profile
Explore more from Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

FTC - the primary government agency responsible for regulating advertising in the United States - favors comparative advertising, because it "encourages product improvement and innovation and can lead to lower prices in the marketplace."

United StatesMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment

FTC—the primary government agency responsible for regulating advertising in the United States—favors comparative advertising, because it "encourages product improvement and innovation and can lead to lower prices in the marketplace." The courts, however, will protect only comparative advertising that is not literally false or ambiguous and does not have the tendency to deceive the buying public.

Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act provides a federal cause of action for false or misleading advertising against "[a]ny person who . . . in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, quality or geographic origin of his or another person's goods, services, or commercial activities." To prevail on a Section 43(a) false advertising claim, a plaintiff must demonstrate the misrepresentation is one of "fact," by showing the advertising is either literally false or misleading. If the ad is literally false—100% organically grown ingredients—a court

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from