Search for: "T-UP v. Consumer Protection"
Results 2881 - 2900
of 4,765
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Dec 2013, 8:08 am
Piracy is the issue that we all want to prevent, but if you give people something of value, won’t people protect that good as something more valuable? [read post]
9 Dec 2013, 7:06 am
One Pennsylvania case found that consumers couldn’t state a claim under Pennsylvania’s consumer protection law for failing to disclose known side effects. [read post]
9 Dec 2013, 3:13 am
You can see the clear link with baby food, can’t you? [read post]
6 Dec 2013, 12:16 pm
On appeal, the Ninth Circuit considered whether the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) provides for a cause of action for contributory cybersquatting. [read post]
6 Dec 2013, 11:55 am
It is for this precise reason that the USDA has repeatedly rejected calls from the meat industry to hold consumers primarily responsible for E. coli O157:H7 infections caused, in part, by mistakes in food-handling or cooking.[34] E. coli O157:H7 infection may lead to severe complications, both acute and chronic. [read post]
5 Dec 2013, 8:07 pm
It is for this precise reason that the USDA has repeatedly rejected calls from the meat industry to hold consumers primarily responsible for E. coli O157:H7 infections caused, in part, by mistakes in food-handling or cooking.[34] E. coli O157:H7 infection may lead to severe complications, both acute and chronic. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 12:31 pm
Protecting the consumer from what? [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 11:04 am
Proper disclosures can manage this risk.A Historical FTC Perspective: Advertorials, Infomercials, and Paid Endorsement Lesley Fair, Staff Attorney, Bureau of Consumer Protection, FTC Settlement: FTC settled with Munsen Specialty Co., in vol. 1 of FTC decisions, 1917—deceptively promoted high tech product through content that didn’t look like ads. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 7:00 am
I couldn’t agree more. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 6:27 am
In Millard v Miller, No. 05-C-103-S, 2005 U.S. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 5:20 am
Reasonable interest test couldn’t be taken at its word—added components to it that weren’t part of the test: purpose is to protect against unfair competition, but consumers universally don’t have standing. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 11:33 am
Consumers often don’t save a “research trail” of the information they consume along the path towards a transaction. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 5:05 am
Scott Paper Co. v. [read post]
29 Nov 2013, 12:08 pm
Williams-Sonoma * California Supreme Court: Retail Privacy Statute Doesn’t Apply to Download Transactions – Apple v Superior Court (Krescent) * Ninth Circuit: FACTA Does not Cover Emailed Receipts — Simonoff v. [read post]
25 Nov 2013, 12:09 pm
”13 The FTC updated its consumer protection rules for online activities in March 2013, taking specific aim at celebrity tweeters.14 These guidelines make it clear that the FTC holds marketing companies and their celebrity endorsers to the same standards with social media and other online ads as they do with more traditional media. [read post]
25 Nov 2013, 11:59 am
[Footnote: See, e.g., Rodriguez-Quinones v. [read post]
22 Nov 2013, 4:06 pm
Collectors who flout the rule even risk enforcement action by consumer protection authorities. [read post]
22 Nov 2013, 2:43 pm
Google’s Forum-Selection Clause Upheld AgainRudgayzer v. [read post]
22 Nov 2013, 8:24 am
Pay the price, or don’t use the technology. [read post]
21 Nov 2013, 2:01 pm
The turkey fryer was warming up and splattered over. [read post]
