1. Home
  2. |Professionals
  3. |David Ervin

David Ervin

Partner
Partner
ZGVydmluQGNyb3dlbGwuY29t
VCardLinkedIn
VCardLinkedIn

Areas of Focus

Overview

Advertisers, broadcasters and publishers trust David Ervin to structure deals and protect their brands and content in a competitive market where technology continues to transform the media and marketing landscape. Leveraging nearly 30 years of transactional and litigation experience – uniquely focused on the intersection of advertising and intellectual property law – he is known for providing comprehensive advice that is both practical and reliable and his effective and thoughtful advocacy.

Dave is a go-to resource for consumer brands making significant investments in media, content creation and marketing partnerships. With experience at every stage of the life cycle of commercial advertising, he regularly negotiates agency agreements and provides counsel to brands on rights clearance, SAG/AFTRA, claim substantiation and media strategies for new campaigns. He has significant experience negotiating deals with celebrity talent, professional sports leagues and teams, entertainment properties, media companies and consumer brands. His consumer protection expertise covers loyalty programs, gift cards and payment devices, e-commerce and deceptive pricing.

Dave helps clients protect and enforce their copyrights and trademark rights in television programming, documentary films, news publications, music, sponsored content and advertisements. From trademark clearance and prosecution to copyright and false advertising litigation, he is focused on efficiently partnering with clients to protect their brand and content investments and implement successful strategies to monetize their creative assets.

Dave co-leads the firm’s Advertising and Brand Protection practice, which is ranked by Chambers USA for Advertising Litigation and by Legal 500 for Advertising & Marketing: Litigation and Advertising & Marketing: Transactional & Regulatory. He is ranked by Chambers USA for Advertising: Transactional & Regulatory.

Career & Education

    • Government Accountability Office
      Office of the General Counsel, 1991
    • Government Accountability Office
      Office of the General Counsel, 1991

    • American University, B.A., cum laude with university honors, international relations, 1989
    • American University Washington College of Law, J.D., cum laude, 1992
    • American University, B.A., cum laude with university honors, international relations, 1989
    • American University Washington College of Law, J.D., cum laude, 1992

    • District of Columbia
    • Virginia
    • District of Columbia
    • Virginia

David's Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 07.02.25

Section 230 Reform: What Websites Need to Know Now

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 has been credited with “creating” the internet by immunizing websites and platforms from lawsuits arising from the content posted by third-party users. Specifically, an internet company is not liable for publishing or posting content drafted by another person under conventional common law tort theories such as defamation or slander, however loathsome, violent or otherwise hateful that content is.  At the same time, Section 230 also immunizes a website or platform that engages in good-faith moderation of content it deems to violate its terms of use/conditions or community standards. ...

View All Insights

Representative Matters

  • Represented financial services, alcoholic beverage, quick-service restaurant and travel companies in successful negotiation of advertising agency agreements with variety of agency holding companies.
  • Represented leading apparel, appliance and retail brands in successful negotiation of variety of celebrity endorsement, brand ambassador and talent agreements.
  • Advised automotive, audio products and retail companies in connection with the launch of consumer loyalty and rewards programs.
  • Represented global hospitality company in successful negotiation of sports sponsorship and marketing agreements with the NFL, Formula 1 racing team and English Premier League soccer team.
  • Represent commercial broadcasters in copyright royalty proceedings including In re Distribution of Cable Royalty Funds, No. 16-CRB-0009 CD (2014-17) involving distribution of cable television royalties in excess of $800 million
  • Successfully represented global hospitality company in trademark infringement and false advertising counterclaims against online travel agency in USDC-ED Texas

David's Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 07.02.25

Section 230 Reform: What Websites Need to Know Now

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 has been credited with “creating” the internet by immunizing websites and platforms from lawsuits arising from the content posted by third-party users. Specifically, an internet company is not liable for publishing or posting content drafted by another person under conventional common law tort theories such as defamation or slander, however loathsome, violent or otherwise hateful that content is.  At the same time, Section 230 also immunizes a website or platform that engages in good-faith moderation of content it deems to violate its terms of use/conditions or community standards. ...

View All Insights

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 07.02.25

Section 230 Reform: What Websites Need to Know Now

Webinar | 06.11.25

Section 230: Implications for Digital Platforms, Online Businesses and E-Commerce

Speaking Engagement | 06.11.25

"Section 230: Implications for Digital Platforms, Online Businesses and E-Commerce," Crowell & Moring Webinar.

Firm News | 11 min read | 06.05.25

Crowell Attains Leading Rankings in Chambers USA 2025

View All Insights

Practices

Industries

David's Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 07.02.25

Section 230 Reform: What Websites Need to Know Now

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 has been credited with “creating” the internet by immunizing websites and platforms from lawsuits arising from the content posted by third-party users. Specifically, an internet company is not liable for publishing or posting content drafted by another person under conventional common law tort theories such as defamation or slander, however loathsome, violent or otherwise hateful that content is.  At the same time, Section 230 also immunizes a website or platform that engages in good-faith moderation of content it deems to violate its terms of use/conditions or community standards. ...

View All Insights