Allen v. National Video, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “the unauthorized use of a person’s name or photograph in a manner that creates the false impression that the party has endorsed a product or service in interstate commerce violates the Lanham Act”
• holding that “the unauthorized use of a person’s name or photograph in a manner that creates the false impression that the party has endorsed a product or service in interstate commerce violates the Lanham Act”
• noting that although evidence of actual confusion is probative of likelihood of confusion, it is not required
• determining that contract formation was a fact issue because although party against whom agreement was enforced did not sign written agreement, “the parties otherwise played their parts under the contract”
• finding Lanham Act violation based on portrayal in advertisement of a look-alike of plaintiff Woody Allen as \satisfied holder\ of defendant's product
• holding disclaimer insufficient as a matter of law where it appeared \in tiny print at the bottom of the page\ so was \unlikely to be noticed by most readers\ of the magazine at issue

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).