Disclosures

Subscribe to Disclosures

Customer reviews and ratings are powerful, low-cost marketing tools. Technology now allows marketers to harness this power on a scale that was unimaginable even five years ago. The ability to solicit, capture, and post reviews and ratings is virtually seamless. But it is just as easy to seek shortcuts or abuse the system. In response, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has devoted resources to addressing consumer review fraud, including through public education. Early in the year, it issued nonbinding guidance for both marketers and online review platforms, warning against potentially deceptive acts, such as faking, manipulating, or suppressing online reviews, as well as paying for higher rankings from purportedly “independent” consumer ranking websites. Online reviews should reflect customers’ honest opinions. So how does the FTC suggest you get there?…

Continue Reading A Sign of the Times: Federal Trade Commission Releases Guidance on Consumer Reviews

On Monday the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission issued a cease-and-desist order to Kim Kardashian for failing to disclose that she received $250,000 to promote EthereumMax’s digital tokens, “EMAX tokens,” on social media.

The SEC considers the EMAX token to be an investment contract, a type of security under the SEC’s jurisdiction. EMAX tokens are available for public trading on cryptocurrency exchanges, and the SEC found that purchasers would have had a reasonable expectation of profits from their investment in EMAX tokens as a result of the efforts of the company behind the token.…

Continue Reading Keeping Up with Disclosures: SEC Punishes Kim Kardashian for Crypto Promotion

Last week, the National Advertising Division (NAD) held its annual conference. The wide array of speakers covered a broad range of topics, from the metaverse to dark patterns, social justice, environmental claims, and (as always) substantiation and disclosures. Multiple speakers from the Federal Trade Commission also presented and gave insight into the FTC’s current priorities.

The regulators. Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, made clear that the agency is closely tracking practices it believes result in consumer economic harm and consumer surveillance and privacy issues. He made clear that the Commission is not shying away from seeking big ticket monetary relief against national well-known advertisers, and intends to hold individuals and executives responsible for their companies’ advertising practices. In addition, Serena Viswanathan, FTC’s Associate Director in the Division of Advertising Practices, highlighted the Commission’s focus on disclosure issues as well as endorsements and reviews, such as review solicitation and aggregation, and product ranking websites.…

Continue Reading Takeaways from NAD 2022: The FTC’s Enforcement Priorities, New Technologies, Dark Patterns, and the Usual Suspects

Webinar | July 19, 2022 | 2:00 – 3:00 p.m. ET | REGISTER

Although the concept is not new, challenges to “dark patterns” are rising all over the country.  The Federal Trade Commission, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, state attorneys general, and class action plaintiffs increasingly cite this phrase in such complaints as deceptively enrolling consumers…

The FTC is off to the races with another proposed rulemaking. On June 23, the FTC, by a 4-1 vote, issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) to combat what it perceives as “junk fees” and “bait-and-switch advertising tactics” in the auto sales industry. Congress gave the FTC the authority to write rules governing the retail sale of automobiles, using APA rulemaking and not the more cumbersome Magnuson Moss rulemaking that the FTC normally must follow in consumer protection rulemakings. This authority is no small matter, as on June 30, the Supreme Court issued its decision in West Virginia v. EPA, which will make rulemakings by the FTC and other government agencies more challenging.

The FTC’s proposed rule would prohibit certain misrepresentations, require certain disclosures, prohibit certain “add-ons,” and require more thorough recordkeeping. First, among a whole host of potential misrepresentations, the proposed rule includes prohibiting misrepresenting regarding vehicle costs; terms of purchasing, financing, or leasing; and the availability of vehicles at an advertised price.…

Continue Reading FTC Starts the Engine on Car Sales Fees and Advertising Rulemaking, but Other Rulemaking Faces Major Questions

The Federal Trade Commission has requested public input about potential updates to its “Dot.Com Disclosures.” The guidance document was last updated nearly a decade ago and has not addressed much of the new technology that has emerged and the evolution in online advertising. As a result, the agency’s call for comments will allow those interested to provide feedback and suggestions to modernize the guides. Comments are due by August 2, 2022.

The FTC has asked for industry stakeholders’ input on many issues, including:…

Continue Reading FTC Asks Online Advertisers to Weigh in on Dark Patterns, Calls for Comment on Its .Com Disclosures Guidance

On March 23, Utah Governor Spencer Cox signed into law sweeping amendments to the state’s Business Opportunity Disclosure Act (BODA). The amendments expand the scope of the statute to cover a broad spectrum of business activity. The amendments apply to any seller of a “business opportunity” who represents to the buyer that the buyer will—or may—derive income from the business that exceeds the amount the buyer pays to buy the product, equipment, supply, or service.

How Do the Amendments Expand the Scope of BODA?

Prior to these amendments, BODA applied to sellers of “assisted marketing plans”—defined as the sale or lease of any product, equipment, supplies, or service to a buyer for an initial payment of $500 or more for the purpose of enabling the buyer to start a business—who also made one of four qualifying representations to buyers about the plan. The first three representations are largely unchanged in the new amendments, but the fourth, which has been the focus of litigation under BODA, has changed. The prior language covered representations: that upon payment by the buyer of more than $500 to the seller, the seller will provide a sales program or marketing program that will enable the buyer to derive income that exceeds the price paid.…

Continue Reading Biz Opps Stung, Once Again, by the Beehive State

I’ve never really understood the saying “You can’t have your cake and eat it, too,” but I was reminded of it when I read U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg’s opinion rejecting the FTC’s efforts to stay or voluntarily dismiss the federal court action brought against Fleetcor and its CEO.

Some background: The FTC sued Fleetcor in December 2019 in federal court in Georgia, alleging the fleet leasing company failed to adequately disclose the fees it charged and made deceptive claims about the money that businesses could save by using its services The case was litigated furiously, but then the Supreme Court gutted the FTC’s claim for relief in AMG. When a quick congressional fix did not occur, the FTC engaged in an “inventive” litigation strategy. The agency filed an administrative (Part III) action before its ALJ and asked the district court to stay or dismiss without prejudice the district court proceeding. The FTC indicated it intended to return to the district court after the conclusion of the administrative proceeding to recover redress under Section 19(a)(2). The defendants opposed the motion.

On February 7, 2022, Judge Totenberg denied the FTC’s motion. Summary judgment and Daubert motions had been fully briefed before the FTC filed its administrate complaint and sought a stay. The FTC urged the stay, arguing that the administrative proceeding could essentially pick up where district court litigation left off and be completed quickly.…

Continue Reading Judge Tells FTC That It Can’t Have Its Part III and Eat It, Too

With Halloween just days away, it is perhaps fitting that the FTC has issued a new enforcement policy statement warning companies not to employ dark patterns to trick customers into a subscription plan. As we covered previously, the FTC has identified dark patterns—or website design features used to deceive consumers—as a priority for both rulemaking and enforcement actions. The timing of the announcement is a bit curious as the FTC is in the middle of a rule making on negative option marketing. More below from Commissioner Wilson on that.

The enforcement policy statement in many ways reflects the requirements of the Restore Online Shoppers Confidence Act (ROSCA) and established FTC precedent regarding negative option marketing. The FTC has been active against companies who hide their subscription programs behind links, have made customers undergo several attempts to cancel their subscription, or companies who failed to disclose that the benefits of their subscription did not exist anymore.…

Continue Reading FTC Issues Dark Forecast for Dark Patterns in Subscription Auto-Renewal

Times of national crisis tend to trigger an uptick in charitable solicitations and charitable giving. And for-profit businesses, including recognizable retail brands, want to do all they can to help as well. As the COVID-19 crisis unfolds, with its far-ranging economic and societal repercussions, many brands are engaging in coronavirus-related commercial co-venture (CCV) activities and cause marketing promotions, advertising to consumers that purchase or use of their product or service will benefit a charity or a charitable purpose.

Although the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a delayed federal income tax filing deadline, mortgage relief programs, and other types of suspended governmental requirements, the regulations applicable to charitable sales promotions and the commercial coventurers who carry them on remain fully in place. In some ways, compliance with these rules—particularly disclosure requirements—is more important than ever given the increased desire to act now and do good. There is no “pandemic exception” for compliance with states’ CCV laws, or state and federal truth‑in-advertising laws. Indeed, while states may accommodate reasonable filing or registration delays caused by COVID-related business interruptions and the FTC similarly has acknowledged the strain on all businesses right now, these regulators will also crack down on marketing abuses that take advantage of consumers’ generosity or fear during the pandemic. For brands wanting to capitalize on the moment, keep in mind the following basics when it comes to conducting a compliant campaign:…

Continue Reading Charitable Sales Promotion Rules and Best Practices: Be Sure to Cross Your T’s and Dot Your I’s During the Pandemic