- 168
I'm not going to comment on this much. I think the court said it better than I ever could. You can read the courts full decision at:
Court Rules: MostChoice Can Say it's Leads are Better Than Netquote's
Here are some quotes from the decision:
"For example, NetQuote admitted that it uses affiliate leads, and deposition testimony shown at trial indicated that affiliate leads tend to be poorer quality. On the other hand, MostChoice repeatedly asserted, and NetQuote failed to disprove, that MostChoice did not use affiliate leads during the time that these ads were online. The fact that MostChoice did not use affiliate leads also supports its claim that its leads are more carefully filtered than NetQuote's leads, as selecting the source of the lead itself can be viewed as a filtering process. Further, MostChoice established at trial that NetQuote sent each of its leads to a greater number of agents than MostChoice did, thereby diluting any single agent's likelihood of closing the sale from a particular lead. The market confirms that MostChoice leads are "better" by allowing MostChoice to command a higher price for its leads. NetQuote has failed, therefore, to prove that this statement was literally false."
"...NetQuote has the burden of demonstrating that, but for MostChoice's false submissions, MostChoice's leads would not have been "Better Than NetQuote Leads." NetQuote has failed to carry that burden. On the contrary, as discussed above, the evidence at trial showed that, even before MostChoice began submitting false applications on NetQuote's website, MostChoice did not purchase affiliate leads, sold its leads to fewer agents, and commanded a higher price for its leads. Further, the false submissions represented such a small percentage of NetQuote's total leads that, although actionable for their effect on specific agents who received those false leads, it is unlikely those false submissions materially affected the overall quality of NetQuote's leads. Thus, NetQuote failed to show that the reason MostChoice's leads were better was because of MostChoice's false submissions for insurance quotes to NetQuote."
"Because this court finds that NetQuote has failed to demonstrate the literal falsity of MostChoice's statements, it is not entitled to injunctive relief. Further, even if NetQuote had proved literal falsity, it would not be entitled to an accounting or disgorgement without proof of actual injury. See id. ("[T]he 'literal falsity' rule has never permitted a plaintiff to recover marketplace damages without other proof that such damages occurred."). NetQuote has failed to prove any injury, so it is not entitled to any such relief.
For the forgoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that NetQuote's claim for false advertising under the Lanham Act is DENIED."
This is similar to the page they are talking about: Insurance Leads except the title was the title mentioned in the decision.
Court Rules: MostChoice Can Say it's Leads are Better Than Netquote's
Here are some quotes from the decision:
"For example, NetQuote admitted that it uses affiliate leads, and deposition testimony shown at trial indicated that affiliate leads tend to be poorer quality. On the other hand, MostChoice repeatedly asserted, and NetQuote failed to disprove, that MostChoice did not use affiliate leads during the time that these ads were online. The fact that MostChoice did not use affiliate leads also supports its claim that its leads are more carefully filtered than NetQuote's leads, as selecting the source of the lead itself can be viewed as a filtering process. Further, MostChoice established at trial that NetQuote sent each of its leads to a greater number of agents than MostChoice did, thereby diluting any single agent's likelihood of closing the sale from a particular lead. The market confirms that MostChoice leads are "better" by allowing MostChoice to command a higher price for its leads. NetQuote has failed, therefore, to prove that this statement was literally false."
"...NetQuote has the burden of demonstrating that, but for MostChoice's false submissions, MostChoice's leads would not have been "Better Than NetQuote Leads." NetQuote has failed to carry that burden. On the contrary, as discussed above, the evidence at trial showed that, even before MostChoice began submitting false applications on NetQuote's website, MostChoice did not purchase affiliate leads, sold its leads to fewer agents, and commanded a higher price for its leads. Further, the false submissions represented such a small percentage of NetQuote's total leads that, although actionable for their effect on specific agents who received those false leads, it is unlikely those false submissions materially affected the overall quality of NetQuote's leads. Thus, NetQuote failed to show that the reason MostChoice's leads were better was because of MostChoice's false submissions for insurance quotes to NetQuote."
"Because this court finds that NetQuote has failed to demonstrate the literal falsity of MostChoice's statements, it is not entitled to injunctive relief. Further, even if NetQuote had proved literal falsity, it would not be entitled to an accounting or disgorgement without proof of actual injury. See id. ("[T]he 'literal falsity' rule has never permitted a plaintiff to recover marketplace damages without other proof that such damages occurred."). NetQuote has failed to prove any injury, so it is not entitled to any such relief.
IV. Conclusion
For the forgoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that NetQuote's claim for false advertising under the Lanham Act is DENIED."
This is similar to the page they are talking about: Insurance Leads except the title was the title mentioned in the decision.
Last edited:
