FTC

Subscribe to FTC via RSS

We’ve all had that moment when we see an ad on social media for a product we were just talking to a friend about. Cox Media Group wanted its customers to believe it was behind this eerily too common phenomenon, but the FTC said otherwise.

On May 21, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced proposed settlements with three companies—CMG Media Corporation, MindSift LLC, and 1010 Digital Works LLC—to resolve charges that they deceived small business customers by selling an advertising service called “Active Listening.”

Continue Reading FTC Settlement Highlights Risks of Deceptive AI Marketing Claims

Join us as we offer a sneak peek into select chapters from the newly released 14th edition of Venable’s Advertising Law Tool Kit, which helps marketing teams navigate their organization’s legal risk. Want more? Click here to download the entire Tool Kit.

Telemarketing and Texting

Telephone and text message marketing poses private litigation risks and regulatory hurdles that should be considered before any campaign. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and states enforce do-not-call (DNC) laws and impose multiple other requirements regarding calling manner, disclosures, consent, opt-out, calling hour limits, caller identification, and telemarketer registration. Calls and texts made to cell phones through the use of certain types of dialing technology (including autodialers) and prerecorded messages (so-called robocalls) require particular attention, as much of the enforcement and litigation in this area involves texting and robocalling.

Continue Reading Inside the Ad Law Tool Kit: Telemarketing and Texting

Continuing with its aggressive enforcement of negative option marketing, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a $35 million settlement with online digital photo and video platform Shutterstock to resolve allegations that Shutterstock violated Section 5 of the FTC Act and the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA) in connection with its subscription services. The FTC alleged that Shutterstock failed to disclose material terms before billing, charged consumers for products without their informed consent, and made cancellation difficult.

Shutterstock offers consumers several plans for licensing content on its website, varying in price and in the number of downloads available. The complaint alleges that Shutterstock offered most of its content through online subscriptions since at least 2020.

Continue Reading Shutterstock Settles with FTC for $35 Million for Subscription and Negative Option Marketing Practices

Last week, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), on behalf of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and the Illinois attorney general filed a federal lawsuit in the Northern District of Illinois against Premium Home Service (PHS) and its owner. The complaint alleges that the defendants created thousands of online business listings for purported home repair companies and posted fabricated five-star customer reviews associated with those businesses.

On the same day, the Minnesota attorney general filed a parallel action in state court based on similar alleged conduct, underscoring the potential for overlapping federal and state enforcement.

Continue Reading FTC and State AGs Target Reviews and Deceptive Business Listings in Home Services

Join us as we offer a sneak peek into select chapters from the newly released 14th edition of Venable’s Advertising Law Tool Kit, which helps marketing teams navigate their organization’s legal risk. Want more? Click here to download the entire Tool Kit.

Fee Disclosures

When customers check out, they are used to seeing a list of fees accompanying the primary product or service. Businesses often add these fees for a variety of reasons, and they can go by a variety of names: service fees, convenience fees, or processing fees. While these fees can serve legitimate business purposes, the Federal Trade Commission regulates how these fees are presented to customers for specific industries through targeted rules such as Trade Regulation Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees and has broad authority to combat unfair and deceptive pricing acts or practices through Section 5 of the FTC Act.

Continue Reading Inside the Ad Law Tool Kit: Fee Disclosures

Join us as we offer a sneak peek into select chapters from the newly released 14th edition of Venable’s Advertising Law Tool Kit, which helps marketing teams navigate their organization’s legal risk. Want more? Click here to download the entire Tool Kit.

Commercial email marketing poses private litigation risks and regulatory hurdles that should be considered before launching any campaign to ensure compliance. The Federal Trade Commission Act requires truthful and non-misleading advertising, and the Federal CAN-SPAM Act prohibits false or deceptive email headers (which are generally defined as the sending domain names and “from” lines) and subject lines, requires opt-out options, and mandates identification of commercial emails as advertising.

Continue Reading Inside the Ad Law Tool Kit: Email Marketing

From one-click checkouts to autofilled payment fields, the modern payment experience is built on convenience. Consumers have come to expect that apps, websites, and even their mobile devices will seamlessly store and deploy their payment credentials with minimal friction. But beneath this ease lies a growing legal tension, particularly in subscriptions and automatic renewals programs, where sales and marketing laws require clear disclosures before obtaining the consumer’s billing information.

ROSCA Compliance and Subscription Disclosure Timing

The Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) lawsuit against Uber Technologies illustrates how this tension plays out in practice. The case focuses on Uber’s “Uber One” subscription program and how subscription enrollment is embedded within an app ecosystem where users have already stored payment credentials for one-off transactions. Under the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA), material subscription terms must be disclosed before obtaining consumers’ billing information.

Continue Reading Stored Payment Credentials and ROSCA: Lessons from the FTC’s Uber Case

Last week, a federal judge in the Northern District of California ruled on Uber’s motion to dismiss a case brought by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) alleging deceptive practices in connection with its Uber One subscription program. The complaint alleged violations of the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA) and deceptive advertising and marketing misrepresentations in violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act and numerous state laws.

FTC Uber Lawsuit and ROSCA Claims

The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss. The court granted the motion to dismiss as to only two discrete aspects of the complaint. First, it dismissed the FTC’s subclaim challenging Uber’s “$0 delivery fee” representation, holding that the statement was not misleading as a matter of law because it was expressly limited to “eligible” orders and therefore would not lead a reasonable consumer to believe all orders qualified.

Continue Reading FTC v. Uber: California Court Allows Claims against Uber One Subscription to Proceed

On March 13, the Trump administration issued an executive order (EO), “Ensuring Truthful Advertising of Products Claiming to be Made in America,” aimed at ensuring products advertised as “Made in America” or “Made in USA” are actually made in the United States.

The EO directs the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to prioritize enforcement of unfair or deceptive “Made in America” or “Made in the USA” or any similar U.S.-origin claims and to consider proposing regulations that would require online marketplaces to establish procedures for verifying country-of-origin claims.   

Additionally, the EO requires agencies with oversight of country-of-origin labeling, in consultation with the FTC, to consider promulgating regulations that promote voluntary country-of-origin labeling for products made or manufactured in the U.S.

Continue Reading FTC Targets “Made in USA” Claims Under New Executive Order

On March 20, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the administrative adjudication of deceptive advertising claims by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) violates the constitutional separation of powers, which grants exclusive judicial authority to Article III courts. Without deciding on the merits of the FTC’s deceptive advertising argument, the court concluded in Intuit v. FTC that the FTC must argue its claims in federal court, not in front of an in-house administrative law judge (ALJ).

FTC Administrative Adjudication Faces Constitutional Limits

This case extends the Supreme Court’s reasoning in Jarkesy, which held unconstitutional the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) use of ALJs to adjudicate securities fraud claims. Although the Intuit court’s ruling is limited to deceptive advertising cases, Jarkesy and Intuit raise significant doubt as to the FTC’s ability to issue administrative cease-and-desist orders under the FTC Act.

Continue Reading Intuit v. FTC Reshapes Deceptive Advertising Enforcement Authority