Photo of Leonard L. Gordon

Leonard L. Gordon

Subscribe to Leonard L. Gordon's Posts

Len Gordon, chair of Venable’s Advertising and Marketing Group, is a skilled litigator who leverages his significant experience working for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to help protect his clients’ interests and guide their business activity. Len regularly represents companies and individuals in investigations and litigation with the FTC, state attorneys general, the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Len also represents clients in business-to-business and class action litigation involving both consumer protection and antitrust issues. He also counsels clients on antitrust, advertising, and marketing compliance issues.

Contact:Read more about Leonard L. Gordon

As part of a flurry of activity this week before the change in its leadership, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced proposed rulemakings regarding deceptive earnings claims by multilevel marketers and money-making opportunity sellers. Whether a Republican-led agency will finalize these proposals is far from clear. The proposed rulemakings include the following:

  • A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposing amendments to the FTC’s Business Opportunity Rule (BOR)
  • A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposing a new rule addressing deceptive earnings claims in the multilevel marketing industry (ECR)
  • An Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking asking whether the FTC should propose additional rule requirements that would apply to the multilevel marketing industry

Continue Reading FTC Issues Proposed Rulemakings Related to Deceptive Earnings Claims

This week, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the New York attorney general announced a settlement with Handy Technologies, Inc. to resolve allegations that the company engaged in an array of unfair and deceptive practices that violated Section 5 of the FTC Act and New York advertising laws. This settlement is yet another indication of the FTC’s continued emphasis on protecting workers’ rights, an emphasis that may continue under a new administration.

The complaint alleged that Handy, a gig-economy platform that connects workers with home cleaning and handyman services, misled workers by advertising inflated earnings claims and failing to clearly disclose fees and fines that withheld millions of dollars from workers’ pay.Continue Reading FTC and New York Attorney General Settle with Handy for Deceptive Practices

This week, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Illinois attorney general announced a settlement with Grubhub Inc. to resolve allegations that the company engaged in an array of unfair and deceptive practices that violated Section 5 of the FTC Act, the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA), the FTC’s new Impersonation Rule, and Illinois state consumer protection laws. The FTC announced the case as Chair Lina Khan’s tenure at the helm of the FTC comes to an end, and the case highlights many of the approaches Khan has pushed for during her reign.

The complaint alleged that Grubhub, an online food ordering and delivery platform, engaged in practices that harmed diners, delivery workers, and restaurant owners. Grubhub reportedly deceived diners by advertising low or no delivery fees but then added hefty charges at checkout. Even members of the company’s subscription program, Grubhub+, who paid $9.99 per month for “unlimited free delivery,” were charged these additional fees without proper disclosure.Continue Reading FTC and Illinois Attorney General Settle with Grubhub for Deceptive Practices

This week, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued its long-awaited Final Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees. When the FTC released the proposed rule over a year ago, the rule covered any business that offered goods or services for sale. The Commission largely narrowed the rule’s application, which now focuses on live-event tickets and short-term lodging (defined as a hotel, motel, inn, short-term rental, vacation rental, or other place of lodging).

The Final Rule also covers third-party travel service providers, including online travel agencies and travel advisors. The FTC did not shed much light on its reasoning, but Republican Commissioner Melissa Holyoak’s concurring statement on the overly broad scope of the earlier version provides some indication of an effort to make the rule more palatable to the incoming Congress, which could repeal the rule through the Congressional Review Act.Continue Reading FTC Issues Scaled-Back Final Fee Rule Targeting Live-Event Tickets and Short-Term Lodging

Just before Thanksgiving, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a Final Rule significantly expanding the coverage of the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR). The amendment extends the TSR’s prohibition against deceptive practices to cover inbound telemarketing calls for technical support services.

Under the amendment, technical support services are defined as “any plan, program, software, or service that is marketed to repair, maintain, or improve the performance or security of any device on which code can be downloaded, installed, run, or otherwise used, such as a computer, smartphone, tablet, or smart home product, including any software or application run on such device.”Continue Reading Telemarketing Sales Rule Amendment Sparks Debate Between FTC Republicans Ahead of Administration Transition

Last month, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced an enforcement action against Evolv Technologies, alleging that the company made deceptive claims about the capabilities of its AI-powered security screening system, including in school settings. Among other allegations, the complaint alleged that Evolv advertised that its systems could reliably detect all weapons, but the systems consistently failed to detect guns and knives and routinely gave false alarms.

The FTC also announced a proposed settlement. Interestingly, the two sitting Republican commissioners, one of whom will likely be the acting chair after January 20, disagreed on the scope of the proper remedy under Section 13(b) of the FTC Act. While commissioners Andrew Ferguson and Melissa Holyoak both supported the FTC’s settlement with Evolv, they disagreed on the FTC’s authority to provide relief in the form of contract cancellation for school customers.Continue Reading The Dueling Views of FTC Commissioners Ferguson and Holyoak on the Scope of Agency Authority

Episode 9 of Venable’s Ad Law Tool Kit Show, Season 2,is now available. Listen to “Understanding False Advertising Claims, Part 1: Litigation” here, or search for it in your favorite podcast player.

The first rule of advertising compliance is that advertising must be truthful and not misleading to consumers. All material advertising claims also must be substantiated. There are many venues in which a business can challenge a competitor who fails to follow those rules. What are the different ways in which an advertising claim can be false or misleading?

In the first of two episodes about false advertising claims, Venable partners Liz Rinehart and Roger Colaizzi discuss the many types of false advertising claims and how to be sure your business can avoid them.Continue Reading Listen to Venable’s Ad Law Tool Kit Show Podcast – “Understanding False Advertising Claims, Part 1: Litigation”

Episode 8 of Venable’s Ad Law Tool Kit Show, Season 2, is now available. Listen to “State Privacy Laws” here, or search for it in your favorite podcast player.

State privacy laws continue to evolve rapidly, challenging businesses to keep pace. By the end of 2024, businesses will need to comply with up to nine comprehensive state privacy laws, with more laws slated to come into force in 2025 and 2026. To date, all such laws draw inspiration from both the first comprehensive state privacy law—the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)—and the European Union General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). But there are differences.

In this episode, Venable partner Kelly Bastide discusses which laws, if any, apply to your business and how to develop a practical compliance program that harmonizes with the different laws.Continue Reading Listen to Venable’s Ad Law Tool Kit Show Podcast – “State Privacy Laws”

Join us as we spotlight select chapters of Venable’s popular Advertising Law Tool Kit, which helps marketing teams navigate the legal risk of campaigns and promotions. Click here to download the entire Tool Kit, and tune in to the Ad Law Tool Kit Show podcast, to hear the authors of this chapter dive deeper into the issue of Made in USA claims in this week’s episode.

Many customers like to “buy American” and perhaps are willing to pay more to do so. However, if you want to call out the red, white, and blue attributes of your product, you should know that the FTC, as well as some states such as California, have created very specific guidance and laws on what it means for a good to be of domestic origin. Under FTC guidance, final assembly must take place in the United States, and “all or virtually all” of the good must be attributable to U.S. sources. The FTC also considers a claim of Manufactured in the USA or Crafted in the USA to be the same as a Made in USA claim.Continue Reading Made in USA Claims: An Excerpt from the Advertising Law Tool Kit

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) isn’t the only regulator in town when it comes to endorsements and testimonials. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulates investment adviser marketing under its “Marketing Rule.” The rule states that an “advertisement may not include any testimonial or endorsement, and an adviser may not provide compensation, directly or indirectly, for a testimonial or endorsement” unless accompanied by clear and prominent disclosures.

According to an SEC cease-and-desist order, Wahed Invest LLC ran afoul of the Marketing Rule when it disseminated advertisements on its public website, social media, and emails containing endorsements from several professional athletes without the required disclosures. In one instance, a soccer player was paid in stock in Wahed’s parent company, worth about $500,000, and MMA athletes were paid around $30,000 monthly for appearing in the advertisements. The endorsements included statements such as:Continue Reading Foul! SEC Faults Investment Adviser for Inadequate Disclosures on Professional Athlete Endorsements