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.
In March 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against PhD Fitness for allegedly misleadingly marketing the characteristics and benefits of sports supplements. According to the complaint, the company misleadingly markets Pre-JYM and Post-JYM supplements as being scientifically supported and properly dosed to provide certain benefits – including muscle endurance, strength, growth, and recovery – when such claims are not true. (Sandviks et al v. PhD Fitness, LLC, Case No. 17-cv-744, D. SC.)
For more information about other class-action lawsuits regarding sports supplements and TINA.org’s coverage of the products, click here.
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.