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 November 2016, a false advertising class-action lawsuit was filed against PhD Fitness for allegedly misleadingly advertising the characteristics and benefits of Pre-JYM and Post-JYM sport supplements. According to the complaint, the company markets the supplements as being scientifically supported and dosed properly to provide various benefits – including muscle endurance, muscle growth, strength, post-workout repair, and recovery – when such claims are not true. The lawsuit was voluntarily dismissed later the same month. The reasons for the dismissal have not been disclosed. (Kirchoff et al v. PhD Fitness, LLC, Case No. 16-cv-8310, C. D. CA.)
For more information about other class-action lawsuits regarding supplements and TINA.org’s coverage of them, 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.