Minn. Stat. § 325D.44, subd. 1. As before, Candyland only argues that its statements were not false or misleading representations of facts, and the parties agree that the analysis of whether a statement is false or misleading is the same under the DTPA as it is for defamation. See also Redwood Cnty. Tel. Co. v. Luttman, No. C6-98-1284, 1998 WL 901752, at *2 (Minn. Ct. App. Dec. 29, 1998). The Court has already determined that most of Candyland's statements cannot be proven false, but Candyland's alleged assertions that Cornfields and Snyder's-Lance stole its trademark may be.