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 December 2013, a federal judge granted final approval of a settlement to a class-action lawsuit filed against Trex Company. The complaint, which was originally filed in 2008, alleges that the company advertises its outdoor decking material products will last 25 years without rotting or splintering when, in reality, the products experience defects shortly after installation. According to the settlement terms, class members will receive either a replacement product or a cash refund for the retail price of the Trex Product that experienced surface flaking. (Ross et al v. Trex Company, Inc., Case No. 09-cv-00670, N. D. CA.).
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.