Advertising Law Blog

Court of Appeals Issues Legal Victory for States Challenge to Department of Justice

Law360 has published an article authored by advertising partner Scott Shaffer entitled “TCPA Future Uncertain After A Tumultuous 2020.” In the article, Mr. Shaffer discusses the legal developments that occurred during last year regarding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and what to expect in 2021.

Andrew Lustigman, head of Olshan’s Advertising, Marketing & Promotions Practice Group, was quoted in Law360 on major upcoming U.S. Supreme Court fights concerning consumer protection, namely, the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) ability to seek monetary restitution for bad marketplace behavior under Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act. Specifically, the Court’s arguments scheduled for January 13 in AMG Capital Management LLC et al. v. FTC challenge allegations that payday loan companies engaged in predatory loan practices. Mr. Lustigman described disgorgement as an “enormous hammer” for the FTC, as a monetary fine equal to sales of a targeted product neglects to take into account a company's other expenses, like taxes and advertising. "There's no setoff," he explained. "They're saying you have to give up everything you took in."

Olshan Advertising partners Andrew Lustigman and Scott Shaffer, along with Olshan Intellectual Property partner Mary Grieco—all of whom are members of Olshan’s Brand Management & Protection Practice Group—will present a webinar entitled “Marketing in the COVID-19 Era” for the Bronx Third Avenue Business Improvement District on December 16 at 9am. Areas to be covered include ecommerce marketing, advertising claims, social media marketing, and data privacy, followed by a Q&A.

The Legal 500 published a Q&A authored by attorneys Andrew Lustigman and Morgan Spina, entitled “United States: Pharmaceutical Advertising”

The client alert addresses how New York has now joined other states with some of the most burdensome automatic renewal laws, enacting a sweeping law that regulates automatic renewal disclosures and cancellation procedures.

Olshan’s Advertising, Marketing & Promotions Practice is providing pro bono legal support on a sweepstakes run by In Good Taste, a fundraising initiative whose goal is to help ease the suffering caused by COVID-19 and racial inequality.

Law360 has published an article authored by advertising partner Scott Shaffer entitled “Charter TCPA Ruling May Benefit Cos. Facing Robocall Claims.” In the article, Mr. Shaffer analyzes a recent ruling, Creasy v. Charter Communications Inc., which held that a significant portion of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) is unenforceable for violations occurring between November 2015 and July 6, 2020.

Court reverses award of $448 million in ill-gotten gains

The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit rejected a district court’s award of $448 million against a pharmaceutical company in a lawsuit brought by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). In an antitrust case styled FTC v. AbbVie, Inc. (decided on September 30, 2020), the Third Circuit ruled that district courts lack the power to order disgorgement under the FTC Act. While the Third Circuit ruled in favor of the FTC on other issues in this case, the reversal of the disgorgement award the FTC is the focus of this blog entry.

Ruling could have broad implications on thousands of pending cases

A federal district court has ruled that the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) is unenforceable for violations occurring between November 2015 and July 6, 2020. The trial court in Creasy v. Charter Communications, in the Eastern District of Louisiana on September 28, 2020, dismissed all asserted TCPA violations alleged to have occurred before July 6, 2020 because a portion of the TCPA was unconstitutional until the Supreme Court “fixed” it on that date.