The purpose of the Lanham Act is to create a civil tort for consumers who believe they have been harmed by false advertising. You have not been harmed. You found a weird thing. Clicking on a website that isn't a website you expected isn't a harm. By posting this you are making clear you know it isn't the website you expected, so it's unclear you were even deceived. If you were deceived by, I don't know, wasting a click, the harm would be de minimis and you'd be bounced from court. You googled the Lanham act to quote it, so you know this.

This is a vaguely interesting thing to think about, but the extreme internet lawyer framing of the post takes away from the weirdness of the thing you found.