E-Mail Communication as "Advertising and Promotion" Under the Lanham Act: Analogy to Offline Cases and Limited New Precedents
Among other things, the Lanham Act sec 43(a)(1) prohibits false or deceptive statements in "commercial advertising or promotion" and provides for a private right of action by any aggrieved party, including consumers and competitors. "Offline" precedents that do not involve e-mail...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 2004-10, Vol.32 (4), p.469 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 469 |
| container_title | Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science |
| container_volume | 32 |
| creator | Keaty, Anne Srivastava, Rajesh Viguerie, Robert |
| description | Among other things, the Lanham Act sec 43(a)(1) prohibits false or deceptive statements in "commercial advertising or promotion" and provides for a private right of action by any aggrieved party, including consumers and competitors. "Offline" precedents that do not involve e-mail but rather videos, letters, and oral communications sent to a small number of customers indicate that in analyzing communications between a seller and buyer in the context of the Lanham Act, the courts are concentrating on two primary things: the nature of the communication and the number of people in the relevant market to whom the communication is sent. These courts' reasoning can serve as a guide for the wary "online" seller to gauge whether its e-mail communications might be considered "advertising and promotion" under the Lanham Act. This analysis would allow a seller to better assess the risk of liability of sending such e-mail communications to prospective buyers. |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_224877022</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>698182961</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p112t-fff36095a6abcd7d7e542e8ef3b0b76e559e4315c112644ade6c7eea59e2ce043</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotT8lOwzAUtBBIlMI_POUeyXHsuOEWRWWRAuVAz5VrP7euErvELogD_05YTiPNppkzMiuEYLlcMH5OZpTWLKeSlpfkKsYDpZSXFZ-Rr2X-pFwPbRiGk3daJRc8qAhZY95xTC46vwPlDbyMYQg_agZrb3CEtEfolN-rARqdbqHxqg-7T0gBVtb2ziO0KmL8TXducAkNPOPH1IQaDfoUr8mFVX3Em3-ck_Xd8rV9yLvV_WPbdPmxKFjKrbVlRWuhKrXVRhqJgjNcoC23dCsrFKJGXhZCT-6Kc2Ww0hJRTTTTOD2dk-yv9ziGtxPGtDmE0zjtjRvG-EJKylj5DcegW1k</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>224877022</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>E-Mail Communication as "Advertising and Promotion" Under the Lanham Act: Analogy to Offline Cases and Limited New Precedents</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Keaty, Anne ; Srivastava, Rajesh ; Viguerie, Robert</creator><creatorcontrib>Keaty, Anne ; Srivastava, Rajesh ; Viguerie, Robert</creatorcontrib><description>Among other things, the Lanham Act sec 43(a)(1) prohibits false or deceptive statements in "commercial advertising or promotion" and provides for a private right of action by any aggrieved party, including consumers and competitors. "Offline" precedents that do not involve e-mail but rather videos, letters, and oral communications sent to a small number of customers indicate that in analyzing communications between a seller and buyer in the context of the Lanham Act, the courts are concentrating on two primary things: the nature of the communication and the number of people in the relevant market to whom the communication is sent. These courts' reasoning can serve as a guide for the wary "online" seller to gauge whether its e-mail communications might be considered "advertising and promotion" under the Lanham Act. This analysis would allow a seller to better assess the risk of liability of sending such e-mail communications to prospective buyers.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0092-0703</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-7824</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JAMSDE</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer Nature B.V</publisher><subject>Advertising campaigns ; Child support ; Commercial markets ; Communication ; Court decisions ; Customers ; E-mail marketing ; Electronic mail systems ; False advertising ; Lanham Act 1946-US ; Trials</subject><ispartof>Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2004-10, Vol.32 (4), p.469</ispartof><rights>Copyright SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. Fall 2004</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Keaty, Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Srivastava, Rajesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Viguerie, Robert</creatorcontrib><title>E-Mail Communication as "Advertising and Promotion" Under the Lanham Act: Analogy to Offline Cases and Limited New Precedents</title><title>Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science</title><description>Among other things, the Lanham Act sec 43(a)(1) prohibits false or deceptive statements in "commercial advertising or promotion" and provides for a private right of action by any aggrieved party, including consumers and competitors. "Offline" precedents that do not involve e-mail but rather videos, letters, and oral communications sent to a small number of customers indicate that in analyzing communications between a seller and buyer in the context of the Lanham Act, the courts are concentrating on two primary things: the nature of the communication and the number of people in the relevant market to whom the communication is sent. These courts' reasoning can serve as a guide for the wary "online" seller to gauge whether its e-mail communications might be considered "advertising and promotion" under the Lanham Act. This analysis would allow a seller to better assess the risk of liability of sending such e-mail communications to prospective buyers.</description><subject>Advertising campaigns</subject><subject>Child support</subject><subject>Commercial markets</subject><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Court decisions</subject><subject>Customers</subject><subject>E-mail marketing</subject><subject>Electronic mail systems</subject><subject>False advertising</subject><subject>Lanham Act 1946-US</subject><subject>Trials</subject><issn>0092-0703</issn><issn>1552-7824</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNotT8lOwzAUtBBIlMI_POUeyXHsuOEWRWWRAuVAz5VrP7euErvELogD_05YTiPNppkzMiuEYLlcMH5OZpTWLKeSlpfkKsYDpZSXFZ-Rr2X-pFwPbRiGk3daJRc8qAhZY95xTC46vwPlDbyMYQg_agZrb3CEtEfolN-rARqdbqHxqg-7T0gBVtb2ziO0KmL8TXducAkNPOPH1IQaDfoUr8mFVX3Em3-ck_Xd8rV9yLvV_WPbdPmxKFjKrbVlRWuhKrXVRhqJgjNcoC23dCsrFKJGXhZCT-6Kc2Ww0hJRTTTTOD2dk-yv9ziGtxPGtDmE0zjtjRvG-EJKylj5DcegW1k</recordid><startdate>20041001</startdate><enddate>20041001</enddate><creator>Keaty, Anne</creator><creator>Srivastava, Rajesh</creator><creator>Viguerie, Robert</creator><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20041001</creationdate><title>E-Mail Communication as "Advertising and Promotion" Under the Lanham Act: Analogy to Offline Cases and Limited New Precedents</title><author>Keaty, Anne ; Srivastava, Rajesh ; Viguerie, Robert</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p112t-fff36095a6abcd7d7e542e8ef3b0b76e559e4315c112644ade6c7eea59e2ce043</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Advertising campaigns</topic><topic>Child support</topic><topic>Commercial markets</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Court decisions</topic><topic>Customers</topic><topic>E-mail marketing</topic><topic>Electronic mail systems</topic><topic>False advertising</topic><topic>Lanham Act 1946-US</topic><topic>Trials</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Keaty, Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Srivastava, Rajesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Viguerie, Robert</creatorcontrib><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Keaty, Anne</au><au>Srivastava, Rajesh</au><au>Viguerie, Robert</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>E-Mail Communication as "Advertising and Promotion" Under the Lanham Act: Analogy to Offline Cases and Limited New Precedents</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science</jtitle><date>2004-10-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>469</spage><pages>469-</pages><issn>0092-0703</issn><eissn>1552-7824</eissn><coden>JAMSDE</coden><abstract>Among other things, the Lanham Act sec 43(a)(1) prohibits false or deceptive statements in "commercial advertising or promotion" and provides for a private right of action by any aggrieved party, including consumers and competitors. "Offline" precedents that do not involve e-mail but rather videos, letters, and oral communications sent to a small number of customers indicate that in analyzing communications between a seller and buyer in the context of the Lanham Act, the courts are concentrating on two primary things: the nature of the communication and the number of people in the relevant market to whom the communication is sent. These courts' reasoning can serve as a guide for the wary "online" seller to gauge whether its e-mail communications might be considered "advertising and promotion" under the Lanham Act. This analysis would allow a seller to better assess the risk of liability of sending such e-mail communications to prospective buyers.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer Nature B.V</pub></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0092-0703 |
| ispartof | Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2004-10, Vol.32 (4), p.469 |
| issn | 0092-0703 1552-7824 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_224877022 |
| source | SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete |
| subjects | Advertising campaigns Child support Commercial markets Communication Court decisions Customers E-mail marketing Electronic mail systems False advertising Lanham Act 1946-US Trials |
| title | E-Mail Communication as "Advertising and Promotion" Under the Lanham Act: Analogy to Offline Cases and Limited New Precedents |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T07%3A11%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=E-Mail%20Communication%20as%20%22Advertising%20and%20Promotion%22%20Under%20the%20Lanham%20Act:%20Analogy%20to%20Offline%20Cases%20and%20Limited%20New%20Precedents&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20Academy%20of%20Marketing%20Science&rft.au=Keaty,%20Anne&rft.date=2004-10-01&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=469&rft.pages=469-&rft.issn=0092-0703&rft.eissn=1552-7824&rft.coden=JAMSDE&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E698182961%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=224877022&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |