USA Nuevos criterios para definición de la publicidad falsa

De la USSC:


"On March 25, 2014, Justice Antonin Scalia authored an opinion for a unanimous United States Supreme Court in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., case number 12-873, setting forth a bright-line test for the right to sue for false advertising under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1125(a). Justice Scalia's two-step inquiry test swept away three different approaches which had divided the various federal courts of appeals. The new Lexmark standard requires the plaintiff to demonstrate (1) that its injury falls within the "zone of interests" protected by the Lanham Act, and (2) proximate causation of that injury by the defendant's misrepresentations. The "zone of interests," according to the Court, refers to a commercial interest in sales or business reputation. Any injury to such a "zone of interest" must "flow[] directly from the deception wrought by the defendant's advertising." The Lexmark standard does not require that the plaintiff making the false advertising Lanham Act claim be a direct competitor of the defendant."


http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/304802/Copyright/The+Supreme+Court+Redefines+Standing+Requirements+For+False+Advertising+Claims