COURT RULES GILLETTE RAZOR AD CLAIM IS FALSE
Schick to Press for Punitive Damages in Trial Against Rival
Current TV ads haven't included either claim, but packaging can and will continue to carry the "up and away" word claim, which the court found unconvincing and unsupported by Gillette research but also concluded was not proved false by Energizer Holdings' Schick unit in its lawsuit against Gillette.
No finding of literal falsity
"While there can be no finding of literal falsity with respect to Gillette's hair extension claim at this stage in the instant litigation, the court expresses doubt about that claim," the ruling said. "As described earlier, Gillette's own testing is suspect."
The ruling went on to say that Schick introduced expert testimony and elicited testimony from Gillette's expert regarding "lack of scientific foundation for any biological mechanism that would explain the effect described by Gillette in its advertising."
Burden of proof
That did not, however, meet Schick's burden in proving falsity of the hair-extension word claim, the court ruled.
Energizer Holdings can continue to seek to prove the word claim false during full trial on its lawsuit, in which it's seeking compensation from Gillette for loss of market share and punitive damages, tapping the company's profits from what's been the best-selling new home and personal-care product of the past year, according to Information Resources Inc. Schick contends its projected sales for its rival Quattro would reach $100 million during the first year, but that it fell short of that target by $20 million at least in part because of M3 Power's ad claims, the ruling said.