There Should Be a Price to Pay for Knowingly Lying to Consumers
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
A false advertising class-action lawsuit was filed against FieldTurf for allegedly misrepresenting Duraspine turf. Among other things, plaintiffs claim that the company misrepresents that turf is durable and long lasting when it does not last as long as promised and the blades of turf fall over and crumble so that the turf becomes unusable. The lawsuit was originally filed in Pennsylvania in November 2017 and transferred to a court in New Jersey in December. (New Castle School District et al v. FieldTurf USA, Inc., FieldTurf Inc., and FieldTurf Tarkett SAS, Case No. 17-cv-13065, D.N.J.)
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
Letters alert agencies and organizations to company’s improper marketing.
TINA.org discovers some roadblocks to unlocking this purportedly free offer.
New research points to “no.”
Why disclosures are key to protecting informed consumer choice and competition.