Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
FTC Proposes New Rules for Endorsements, Testimonials
The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has issued proposed changes to its advertising guides (“Guides”) regarding the use of endorsements and testimonials. The Federal Register notice about the proposed Guides can be found at (http://www.ftc.gov/os/fedreg/2008/november/081128guidesconcerningtheuseofendorsementsandtestimonials.pdf). The deadline for commenting on the proposed Guides is March 2.
Several years in the making, the Guides would change how the FTC considers a firm's obligations to accurately use testimonials to promote its products and services. Under current guidelines, the FTC allows a marketer to use a disclaimer such as “results are not typical” to avoid misleading consumers, with some restrictions. But FTC-commissioned research, cited in the Federal Register notice, indicates that many customers believe they and other purchasers will get the same results as the endorser recites, even if those results are not representative of a typical experience. The FTC's proposed solution is that marketers provide “an affirmative disclosure of the results that are typical.”
What is “typical”? The FTC proposed to define that, too. The advertiser must have “evidence that the endorser's experience is representative of what consumers will generally achieve with the advertised product in actual, albeit variable, conditions of use,” wrote the FTC. As a general rule, the FTC suggested that “representative” reflects the outcome for half of the users of the product or service.
The proposed new Guides also give examples for the first time of how the rules would apply to marketing claims over which the company does not have direct control, such as word-of-mouth information passed along from one consumer to another. Reflecting the development of online promotions, the Guides would incorporate the “potential liability of advertisers who use bloggers to promote their products and of the bloggers themselves,” if those bloggers make misrepresentations.
Although the Guides are advisory in nature (not a trade regulation rule with the force of law, like the Franchise Rule), the proposed changes could have a significant impact on franchisors and franchisees who use customer testimonials in advertising products and services, or who use franchisee testimonials in marketing franchise opportunities. “The difference between Guides and a trade regulation rule, such as the Franchise Rule, is simple,” said David Koch, Plave Koch PLC (Reston, VA). “If you do something contrary to the Franchise Rule, you have violated the law. If you do something contrary to the Guides, you might (or even probably) have violated the law, but the FTC still has to prove that the particular endorsement or testimonial was deceptive as used.”
Koch provided the following example. Franchisors often use customer endorsements to promote the goods and services of the brand, and some franchisors use endorsements from existing franchisees to promote the franchise opportunity. “The impact from the proposed changes in the Guides will depend on how detailed the endorsement is,” he said. “The main question is whether the endorsement conveys specific results that are not likely to be typical for other purchasers. A generic endorsement like 'this is a great product,' or 'I've had a good experience with this franchise' is not going to be affected. On the other hand, a specific endorsement like, 'I lost 30 pounds' or 'I've doubled my income with this franchise' will be greatly affected if the franchisor knows that the stated results are not typical. If the proposed changes are adopted, which seems pretty likely, the franchisor will have to add a statement disclosing the results that are typical. So in the first example, the franchisor would have to add, 'The typical customer loses 5 pounds.'”
While much of the discussion in the Guides reflects problems with weight-loss claims, the application of the rules is much broader. “Obviously, the affirmative disclosure of typical results will dilute the impact of the individual endorser's results ' which is exactly what's intended by the FTC,” said Koch. “In practice, the requirement may discourage franchisors and other advertisers from using any endorsements that convey specific results.”
FTC Proposes New Rules for Endorsements, Testimonials
The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has issued proposed changes to its advertising guides (“Guides”) regarding the use of endorsements and testimonials. The Federal Register notice about the proposed Guides can be found at (http://www.ftc.gov/os/fedreg/2008/november/081128guidesconcerningtheuseofendorsementsandtestimonials.pdf). The deadline for commenting on the proposed Guides is March 2.
Several years in the making, the Guides would change how the FTC considers a firm's obligations to accurately use testimonials to promote its products and services. Under current guidelines, the FTC allows a marketer to use a disclaimer such as “results are not typical” to avoid misleading consumers, with some restrictions. But FTC-commissioned research, cited in the Federal Register notice, indicates that many customers believe they and other purchasers will get the same results as the endorser recites, even if those results are not representative of a typical experience. The FTC's proposed solution is that marketers provide “an affirmative disclosure of the results that are typical.”
What is “typical”? The FTC proposed to define that, too. The advertiser must have “evidence that the endorser's experience is representative of what consumers will generally achieve with the advertised product in actual, albeit variable, conditions of use,” wrote the FTC. As a general rule, the FTC suggested that “representative” reflects the outcome for half of the users of the product or service.
The proposed new Guides also give examples for the first time of how the rules would apply to marketing claims over which the company does not have direct control, such as word-of-mouth information passed along from one consumer to another. Reflecting the development of online promotions, the Guides would incorporate the “potential liability of advertisers who use bloggers to promote their products and of the bloggers themselves,” if those bloggers make misrepresentations.
Although the Guides are advisory in nature (not a trade regulation rule with the force of law, like the Franchise Rule), the proposed changes could have a significant impact on franchisors and franchisees who use customer testimonials in advertising products and services, or who use franchisee testimonials in marketing franchise opportunities. “The difference between Guides and a trade regulation rule, such as the Franchise Rule, is simple,” said David Koch, Plave Koch PLC (Reston, VA). “If you do something contrary to the Franchise Rule, you have violated the law. If you do something contrary to the Guides, you might (or even probably) have violated the law, but the FTC still has to prove that the particular endorsement or testimonial was deceptive as used.”
Koch provided the following example. Franchisors often use customer endorsements to promote the goods and services of the brand, and some franchisors use endorsements from existing franchisees to promote the franchise opportunity. “The impact from the proposed changes in the Guides will depend on how detailed the endorsement is,” he said. “The main question is whether the endorsement conveys specific results that are not likely to be typical for other purchasers. A generic endorsement like 'this is a great product,' or 'I've had a good experience with this franchise' is not going to be affected. On the other hand, a specific endorsement like, 'I lost 30 pounds' or 'I've doubled my income with this franchise' will be greatly affected if the franchisor knows that the stated results are not typical. If the proposed changes are adopted, which seems pretty likely, the franchisor will have to add a statement disclosing the results that are typical. So in the first example, the franchisor would have to add, 'The typical customer loses 5 pounds.'”
While much of the discussion in the Guides reflects problems with weight-loss claims, the application of the rules is much broader. “Obviously, the affirmative disclosure of typical results will dilute the impact of the individual endorser's results ' which is exactly what's intended by the FTC,” said Koch. “In practice, the requirement may discourage franchisors and other advertisers from using any endorsements that convey specific results.”
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.