Articles Posted in Advertising

Posted

A Wall Street Journal article today touts an upcoming book by Harry Hurt III, which recounts a cross-country road trip with an impressive list of encounters with notable figures including former President Bush. But more notably, this book includes a plethora of product-placement deals and other sponsorships. This approach, while innovative, may raise issues in connection with the FTC Endorsement Guidelines. If applicable, the guidelines may create legal issues for Mr. Hurt and the sponsors. A prior post highlights some recent enforcement actions for those who have not complied. This is an issue that journalists and advertisers need to pay heed to because additional enforcements are likely.

The range of sponsorships include deals that range from companies agreeing to:  promote his book through e-mail, Twitter, Facebook and other electronic blasts in exchange for advertising within the book; supply travel gear (e.g. Coleman Co. providing sleeping bag, tent and $2500 cash) for which Mr. Hurt endorses Coleman’s products saying things such as “the Coleman engineers have done a remarkable job…”; and $1,000 in monthly credits from Best Western International in exchange for filming videos showcasing the hotels’ amenities. Interestingly, a hotel spokesperson called this deal “standard industry practice” for bloggers and free-lancers.

Kudos to Mr. Hurt and his sponsors for the innovative approach that enabled him to self fund and self publish this e-book. However,
as the article notes, his dual role as both an ad salesman and a journalist strikes “an unholy alliance.” The issue is whether an author, beholden to such sponsorships, can be objective in his or her writings. In the article, Mr. Hurt stated that the book is “mainly the truth,” but recognized that it may raise questions as to his objectivity. He added that he doesn’t believe his objectivity was compromised because he only struck deals with companies he already patronized and asked readers to trust his judgment and integrity.

I have no reason to doubt Mr. Hurt’s judgment or integrity. However, this scenario raises some interesting legal issues. A growing number of bloggers and other journalists have come under fire for touting products for which they received some undisclosed financial benefit.
While these practices are hopefully the exception rather than the norm, they caused the FTC to take action.

In 2009, the FTC implemented guidelines that addressed the use of endorsements and testimonials in advertising. The main stream press highlighted the part of these guidelines that require disclosure by bloggers of compensation received for recommending a product or service. However, the guidelines include some lesser known provisions, which apply more broadly, and may be relevant to the types of deals that Mr. Hurt struck.

The guidelines are not limited to bloggers, but cover “any advertising message” that consumers are likely to believe reflects the opinions, beliefs, findings, or experiences of the endorser (or any party other than the sponsoring advertiser). This includes testimonials endorsing a product or service on any social media site, not just blogs.

When a connection exists between the endorser and the seller of an advertised product that might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement, such connection must be fully disclosed. For example,
the FTC says that if a blogger gets a free video game to evaluate and review,
he must clearly and conspicuously disclose that he received the game for free. Other examples refer to the dissemination of information through other “consumer-generated media.” Presumably, a self-published e-book  could be a form of “consumer-generated media.”
For at least these reasons, self-publishers of blogs, e-books or other media should become familiar with these FTC guidelines. Failure to comply can result in liability for the endorser.

However, the burden of compliance and risk of liability do not fall just on the journalists/endorsers. Rather, the FTC guidelines impose significant obligations on the part of advertisers, too.

The FTC guidelines require advertisers to advise the “endorser”
that their connection needs to be disclosed. Additionally, the guidelines state that advertisers should have procedures in place to monitor the endorsements for compliance. Advertisers are subject to liability for false or unsubstantiated statements made through endorsements, or for failing to disclose material connections between themselves and their endorsers. 

Another aspect of the guidelines relates to “expert”
endorsements. Whenever an advertisement represents, directly or by implication,
that the endorser is an expert with respect to the endorsement message, then the endorser’s qualifications must in fact give the endorser the expertise that he or she is represented as possessing with respect to the endorsement.

The guidelines also address endorsements by organizations,
especially expert ones. According to the guidelines, such endorsements are viewed as representing the judgment of a group whose collective experience exceeds that of any individual member, and whose judgments are generally free of the sort of subjective factors that vary from individual to individual. Therefore,
the FTC requires that an organization’s endorsement must be reached by a process sufficient to ensure that the endorsement fairly reflects the collective judgment of the organization. Moreover, if an organization is represented as being expert, then, in conjunction with a proper exercise of its expertise in evaluating the product it also must comply with various provisions regarding experts.

In order to comply with these FTC guidelines, journalists, advertisers and other organizations should seek legal counsel to become familiar with these requirements and, as many companies are doing, develop policies and procedures for complying.

Posted

movietickets.jpgA court dismissed claims against online discount program Webloyalty.com and MovieTickets.com alleging that they deceptively enrolled plaintiff in a program that he would not have joined had he know the terms. The court distinguished these companies’ disclosures from those
recently held actionable in the Keithly case. 

After the disclosures were presented to him, Plaintiff Berry took three
affirmative steps to accept the terms of the club membership. He entered his
email twice and clicked the ‘Yes’ button. The court further noted that right below the Yes button was a ‘No thanks’ button which he could have clicked to refuse membership. Additionally, the court found that at least five notices were provided to inform Plaintiff that his  credit card
would be charged.

The type of data-sharing arrangement between defendants, in which consumers are presented with
an offer from a third party following an online purchase, and through which they
are charged via the payment information they provided to the first website, has
come under scrutiny of legislators and regulators. This case highlights that with adequate disclosure, websites and offers companies can insulate themselves from liability for these types of claims.

A recently enacted law prohibits post-transaction third party sellers from charging consumers for
goods or services without the consumer’s express informed consent.

Posted

Some say Gamification has become the buzz word du jour. Others believe
it is a powerful business tool that cannot be overlooked. A recent Gartner report will undoubtedly fuel the fires in that debate. The Gartner report states that by 2015, more than 50 percent of companies that manage innovation processes will gamify those processes. Additionally, it states that a gamified service for consumer goods marketing and customer retention
will become as important as Facebook, eBay or Amazon, and more than 70
percent of Global 2000 organizations will have at least one gamified
application.

game.jpegRecent books such as Game-based Marketing by Gabe Zichermann and Reality is Broken by Jane McGonigal have highlighted why and how gamification can be a powerful tool if used right.reality.jpeg

Gabe also hosted the first Gamification Summit in San Francisco earlier this year and is hosting a series of Gamification Workshops for those interested in learning more about Gamification.

Many major companies (e.g., NBC Universal and CBS Interactive) are embracing gamification with great success.

As always, along with the great business opportunities come some legal issues of which companies need to be aware. One of the issues, which relates to issuing points or other things of value to reward consumers for creating product reviews or recommendations, was addressed in one of our prior posts relating to the FTC Endorsement Guidelines. A more recent post addresses some recent enforcement actions by the FTC and NY State for violations of these principles.

A number of other legal issues can arise. Additionally, we are seeing a rapid uptick in the number of patent applications being filed for gamification technology and business methods. For example, there are a number of companies offering gamification platforms. One that has an interesting business model is Big Door Media. Big Door offers free APIs and widgets to enable you to easily and cost effectively get started. Bunchball and Badgeville also offer gamification platforms and tools.

Like other cutting edge business models, gamification requires a well thought out business strategy and an understanding of the relevant legal principles!

Posted

Congressman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), a senior member and former chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee’s Communications, Technology and the Internet Subcommittee, sent a letter dated February 8, 2011 to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) requesting more information about possible consumer protection issues related to “in-app” purchases, particularly relating to kids.

The following is an excerpt from the letter:

I am disturbed by news that in-app purchases may be taking advantage of children’s lack of understanding when it comes to money and what it means to ‘buy’ an imaginary game piece on the Web.  Companies shouldn’t be able to use Smurfs and snowflakes and zoos as online ATMs pulling money from the pockets of unsuspecting parents.  The use of mobile apps will continue to escalate, which is why it is critical that more is done now to examine these practices. I will continue to closely monitor this issue and look forward to the FTC’s response.”

Click here for a copy of the letter

It is important for companies to understand the potential legal issues with innovative business models and to ensure clarity so that consumers understand

Posted

Originally posted on the Gamification Blog.

Many people are aware that in 2009,
the FTC implemented guidelines that addressed the use of endorsements and testimonials by bloggers. The main stream press highlighted just the part of these guidelines that require disclosure by bloggers of compensation received for recommending a product or service. However, the guidelines include some lesser known provisions which apply more broadly to consumer generated media and relate to gamification.

  • The guidelines are not limited to bloggers, but cover any advertising message,
    including consumer-generated media,
    that consumers are likely to believe reflects the opinions, beliefs, findings,
    or experiences of the endorser. This includes consumer testimonials, such as reviews or recommendations endorsing a product or service on any social media site, not just blogs.
  • When a connection exists between the endorser and the seller of an advertised product that might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement, such connection must be fully disclosed. In one example, the FTC says that if a blogger gets a free video game to evaluate and review, he must clearly and conspicuously disclose that he received the game for free. In another example, it states that if someone receives redeemable points each time they tell friends about a product, this fact needs to be clearly and conspicuously disclosed.
  • In these examples, the FTC also states that the company needs to advise the consumer giving the testimonial that this connection should be disclosed,
    and it should have procedures in place to try to monitor the consumer’s postings for compliance.
  • Advertisers are subject to liability for false or unsubstantiated statements made through endorsements, or for failing to disclose material connections between themselves and their endorsers. Endorsers may also be liable.
  • Whenever an advertisement represents, directly or by implication, that the endorser is an expert with respect to the endorsement message, then the endorser’s qualifications must in fact give the endorser the expertise that he or she is represented as possessing with respect to the endorsement. This raises potential gamification issues with leader boards, badges and expert status to the extent that this implies an “expert”
    status that the user does not actually posses.

This is just one of many examples of little known laws that relate to gamification.

Posted

Target’s recent launch of a program to sell gift cards redeemable for Facebook Credits or in the virtual world Poptropica towards either membership fees or the purchase of virtual currency further blurs the line (to the extent there still was one) between in-worldfacebookx-large.jpgcurrency and real-world currency. Facebook and Zynga agreed earlier this year that players of Zynga games (such as Farmville) can use Facebook Credits to buy virtual goods, but there is no reason why real-world retailers looking to attract Facebook users and create online buzz couldn’t set up exclusive deals for Facebook Credits. Steve Richards has an interesting post at ecoconsultancy.com on just that topic – he even questions how long it will be before sites that enable you to buy, sell and trade virtual currencies become regulated exchanges.

As the line between virtual and real-world currencies disappears, there are a host of legal issues that virtual world operators will need to deal with. As we noted in this post, because of laws like the CARD Act and various state, local and even international laws and regulations related to the use of stored value cards and accounts, it is important to ensure that if you are offering virtual currency as part of your business model, you verify that you are in compliance with federal, state and international laws.

For more information on legal issues with virtual currencies see our

Overview of Legal Issues with Virtual Currencies.

Posted

SprBigGLP.jpg
Social gaming powerhouse Zynga has joined forces with 7-Eleven to begin selling items branded with its popular gaming titles in 7-Eleven stores throughout the US and Canada. The six week promotion will include more than 30 products, including Slurpees and Big Gulp drinks, all with redemption codes that will allow users to purchase virtual goods, including limited edition and uber gifts, in FarmVille, Mafia Wars or YoVille. The virtual goods range from a virtual coffee cart in FarmVille redeemed from the purchase of an iced coffee, to a bullet proof vest redeemed from the purchase of pizza, chicken wings, Big Bite products, chicken tenders or breakfast quesadillas. 7-Eleven expects to promote the new campaign, which begins June 1, through several different media outlets, including radio, print, online and on MTV.
FarmvilleIceCream.jpg