The Heart Attack Grill in Arizona recently filed a complaint against Heart Stoppers Sports Grill in Florida for, among other things, trade mark infringement and unfair competition.  read more »

The recent Australian Federal court case of Nutrientwater Pty Ltd v Baco Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 2 concerned competitors in the market for water beverages enhanced with nutrients and vitamins. It specifically looks at whether Baco’s adoption of similar get-up for its enhanced water product range compared to Nutrientwater’s range was passing off or misleading and deceptive conduct under the Trade Practices Act.    read more »

Rightly or wrongly, complaint resolution mechanisms in self-regulated industries have – from time to time – been unfavourably compared to judicial systems.  The theory is that a self-regulated process is more likely to be ‘captured’ by industry participants, and not lead to decisions made without fear or favour.  So, it is interesting to see the Advertising Standards Board (ASB) adopting techniques at the forefront of judicial practice.  read more »

The Full Federal Court this morning dismissed an appeal by Mars in proceedings relating to the packaging of a chocolate coated malt ball product known as "Malt Balls".  Justices Bennett, Emmett and Edmonds all agreed with the trial judge that the packaging of Australian confectionery importer Sweet Rewards’ "Malt Balls" product would not mislead consumers, as it did not contain the word "Maltesers", and that the words "Malt Balls" were not being used by Sweet Rewards as a trade mark.  We acted for Sweet Rewards in this case.  read more »

On 1 December 2009, online retailer Topbuy was issued with a formal warning from the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) for breaching the Spam Act 2003. Following investigations into three commercial electronic messages sent by Topbuy to consumers without their consent, ACMA has concluded that these messages represent a broader systemic problem.  read more »

Back in July and September, we blogged on the controversy surrounding the practice of paying internet search engines for keywords to boost one company’s profile over another.  A new instalment has since arisen in what will inevitably be a long running battle between search engine companies and their rivals.  US law firm Habush Habush & Rottier has filed a law suit alleging that, by paying Google to link to the Cannon & Dunphy website when Google users search for the words ‘Habush’ and ‘Rottier’, Cannon & Dunphy have breached Wisconsin privacy laws.

From 1 December 2009, North America’s Federal Trade Commission wants bloggers, including Twitter users, to make it clear when they have received cash or products in exchange for writing positive reviews, endorsements and testimonials.   read more »

The band No Doubt has filed a lawsuit against video game creator Activision Blizzard in the US, claiming fraudulent inducement and breach of contract over the video game Band Hero. Besides being upset that their avatars can perform other bands’ songs, No Doubt’s main gripe is that some of the songs are "not appropriate" such as "Honky Tonky Woman" by the Rolling Stones and "I heard it through the Grape Vine".  But what sort of action could No Doubt bring in Australia for this kind of virtual complaint?  read more »

Vegemite Cheesybite has been announced today as the popular winner (36% of 30,000 votes) of Kraft's naming competition, after iSnack2.0 bit the dust late last week. The runners up included Vegemite Smooth, Vegemite Vegemate, Vegemite Snackmate.

Dean Robbins is the winner of Vegemite's 'Name Me' competition. The new, creamier blend of Vegemite and Kraft cream cheese will be known as iSnack2.0, bringing together Dean's love of technology and Vegemite. But iSnack has already been registered as a trademark by Breville, which could have implications for Kraft's marketing phenomenon.  read more »