The Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act (815 ILCS 510/1) is a lesser-known Illinois statute that can help protect your business from a competitor’s unfair tactics. For example, perhaps your former business partner may advertise your reputation or successes as their own. Or, perhaps a competitor lied about their product quality or service success to try to draw customers away from you and to themselves. Perhaps a competitor (or the owner of a competitor) may post disparaging remarks about your goods or services on social media. A competitor could also advertise in a way that confuses consumers into mistaking your competitor's goods or services for your own. In these instances—and many more—the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act may be able to help. The purpose of the Act is to prohibit unfair competition and acts that unreasonably interfere with another's business conduct. The Act can enjoin trade practices that confuse or deceive the consumer, cause misleading trade identification, and false or deceptive advertising. The Act lists twelve different actions that are
prohibited. This is a non-exhaustive list; the Act instructs courts to construe similar conduct liberally and expand the protections of the Act to include any types of deceptive conduct that arise in the future.
Claims Under the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act
There are several ways to state a claim under the Act—each of which depends on the nature of the claim. For a disparagement claim, you must allege that the defendant communicated to the public about your published false, misleading, or deceptive statements that disparaged your goods or services. For example, an actionable statement could be telling customers that your business is bankrupt or no longer exists. Likewise, a deceptive statement could be telling retailers that your products are knock-
offs, that they don’t work, or have inferior construction. You can also claim that a competitor’s advertising may cause a consumer to confuse your products with theirs. To state a claim for likelihood of confusion, you must allege that the defendant's use of a deceptive trade name, trademark, or other distinctive symbol is likely to confuse or mislead consumers as to the source or origin of the
product or service. These trademark confusion claims often join claims under the
federal Lanham Act for trademark infringement. You don't need to show any damages—or that you’ve lost any customers—to succeed for claims under the Act. Instead, a Court can grant an injunction to stop the deceptive conduct if there is a reasonable probability that a plaintiff will incur actual damages. The
Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act can be a useful tool to help prevent additional damage from a competitor’s false or deceptive statements/online posts.
The 12 prohibited practices covered under the deceptive trade practice act are:
1. Pass off goods or services as those of another.
2. Cause likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding as to the source, sponsorship, approval, or certification of goods or services.
3. Cause likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding as to affiliation, connection, or association with or certification by another.
4. Use deceptive representations or designations of geographic origin in connection with goods or services.
5. Represent that goods or services have sponsorship, approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities that they do not have or that a person has a sponsorship, approval, status, affiliation, or connection that he or she does not have;
6. Represent that goods are original or new if they are deteriorated, altered, reconditioned, reclaimed, used, or secondhand.
7. Represent that goods or services are of a particular standard, quality, or grade or that goods are a particular style or model, if they are of another.
8. Disparage the goods, services, or business of another by false or misleading representation of fact.
9. Advertise goods or services with intent not to sell them as advertised.
10. Advertise goods or services with intent not to supply reasonably expectable public demand, unless the advertisement discloses a limitation of quantity.
11. Make false or misleading statements of fact concerning the reasons for, existence of, or amounts of price reductions.
12. Engage in any other conduct which similarly creates a likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding.
(b) In order to prevail in an action under this Act, a plaintiff need not prove competition between the parties or actual confusion or misunderstanding.
(c) This Section does not affect unfair trade practices otherwise actionable at common law or under other statutes of this State.