Outside Counsel

'Bait and Switch' Advertising and the Lanham Act

, New York Law Journal

   | 0 Comments

Milton Springut writes: A recent Eastern District decision held that use of a trademark in "bait and switch" advertising does not constitute trademark infringement (although it might constitute false advertising). In dismissing the plaintiff's infringement complaint, the decision appears to have unduly narrowed the scope of Lanham Act actionable "confusion."

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

Originally appeared in print as Is 'Bait and Switch' Advertising Actionable Under the Lanham Act?

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202661924051

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.