No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
IF it doesn't fit, keep on trying?: The courts' attempt to find a place for pure political speech in the lanham act
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Stymied by constitutional hurdles designed to advance public discourse, plaintiffs suing media defendants based on editorial content have attempted various maneuvers to sidestep these obstacles. One approach is to avoid the more defendant-friendly defamation claim and opt for a claim under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act. This Comment argues that such an approach disregards both the First Amendment's goal of promoting the free exchange of ideas and section 43(a)'s goal of reducing consumer confusion rather than protecting plaintiffs' reputations. The author suggests that courts should interpret section 43(a) narrowly and allow Lanham Act claims for false advertising or false endorsement only when the speech is commercial. Editorial content neither amounts to advertising nor risks consumer confusion over endorsement of the publication. It should not give rise to a Lanham Act claim.