Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Given the expense and burden of resolving false advertising cases in federal court, the promise of an expedient and less expensive alternate forum invites attention. Adding to speed and thrift an assurance that ads will be assessed by experts in the field makes the forum more interesting still. What is this alluring avenue of adjudication? For 33 years, the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau (NAD) has sought to provide just such a mechanism. Yet, even for long-time veterans of federal proceedings, the NAD may be terra incognita. One recent decision by the NAD, In re Distillerie Stock USA Ltd., NAD Case No. 4197 (June 2004), reveals both benefits and drawbacks of the forum, particularly in how some familiar yet some unique allocations of the burdens of proof can produce results both similar to and quite unlike those in federal court.
Distillerie Stock recently retained the well-known taste-testing service, Beverage Testing Institute (BTI), to conduct blind taste tests comparing its GranGala triple orange liqueur, the second best selling brand in the United States, with number one Grand Marnier and virtually all of the other premium orange liqueurs available in this country. (As reported in another recent NAD decision, In re Sidney Frank Importing Co. Inc., NAD Case No. 4016 (Feb. 2003), the BTI has achieved remarkable consistency in its taste tests, far exceeding what a cynic might dismiss as an inherently subjective subject.) In relevant part, the test showed a marked preference for margaritas mixed with GranGala liqueur over Grand Marnier, numerically ranked at 94 to 86. Stock promptly produced print advertising promoting the comparative product rankings. “We Came, We Mixed, We Won” announced one such promotional item that also reported the test score. Marnier Lapostolle and its U.S. distributor, Schieffelin, objected ' first threatening suit, but ultimately opting instead to mediate the matter before the NAD.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.