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 January 2014, a class action was filed against Ralphs Grocery Co. for allegedly misleadingly labeling its decaffeinated coffee. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the company uses the phrase “without caffeine” on its decaf coffee labels when the decaf coffee actually contains small amounts of caffeine. (Kopallian v. Ralphs Grocery Co. et al., Case No. BC533846, Superior Court for the State of California, Los Angeles County).
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.