Who is No.1? A Case of False Advertising

Who is No.1? A Case of False Advertising

Li Dongtao

Keywords: false advertising, first, lawyer.

The Facts

Be you the first,

To show you know respect.¹ 

The plaintiff and the defendant are .com companies that provide the same online service: advertising Chinese law firms and lawyers.  

The plaintiff began providing this service earlier than the defendant. 

On its website, either the plaintiff or the defendant published an advertisement that identified its website as the “first website for full and concentrated promotion online of Chinese law firms and lawyers throughout the country.”

The defendant also emphasized that the site was "the most authoritative and comprehensive website for legal information at home".

The plaintiff sued the defendant for unfair competition (false advertising).

The defendant argued that the unfair competition was not established but without evidence to prove that it had provided this service earlier than the plaintiff.

The court ruled that the unfair competition was established because without any factual basis, the defendant used the meaningful terms “the first” and “the most authoritative” on its web pages, which referred negatively to the quality of similar service offered by other websites, including the plaintiff’s, and, the public was misled.

In short, be the first, be the defendant, know false advertising.

版权信息: ©2025 Li Dongtao Copyright Reserved.（©2025 李东涛 版权所有）