Monday, November 18, 2013

Regulating Internet Advertising: Keeping Consumers and Businesses Safe


In today's world such a large amount of Internet Advertising is taking place.  Billions of dollars are being spent by businesses to market their products to you, the consumers, via Internet.  Consumers, as they should be, are very much hesitant about making purchases based on these advertisements because they do not know if the the advertiser is being 100 percent truthful with the information they are presenting to potential buyers.  This is why rules and regulations are needed when advertising on the Internet.  These rules and guidelines protect businesses and consumers - and help maintain the credibility of the Internet as an advertising medium. 


The Federal Trade Commission is in charge of enforcing laws about advertising and marketing on the Internet.  Many of the same rules that apply to other forms of advertising apply to electronic marketing.  Advertising must tell the truth and not mislead consumers.  In addition, claims must be substantiated.  As determined by the commission an ad is deceptive if it likely to affect consumers' behavior or decisions about the product or service.  This means that if important relevant information is missing that would have otherwise affected the consumers decision the ad is not truthful. 

Sellers are responsible for claims they make about their products and services. Third parties such as advertising agencies or website designers and catalog marketers may also be liable for making or disseminating deceptive representations if they participate in the preparation or distribution of the advertising, or know about the deceptive claims.

The ad on the left is an example of false advertising.  Costco has never been an authorized retailer of the up-scale label Michael Kors and they were sued for falsely advertising its handbags at bargain prices without authorization. 

There are three remedies offered for false Internet advertising.  They are as follows:

1) Injunctive Relief - Injunctive relief is granted by the courts upon the satisfaction of two requirements. First, a plaintiff must demonstrate a "likelihood of deception or confusion on the part of the buying public caused by a product's false or misleading description or advertising". Second, a plaintiff must demonstrate that an "irreparable harm" has been inflicted, even if such harm is a decrease in sales that cannot be completely attributed to a defendant's false advertising.

2) Corrective Advertising - Corrective advertising can be ruled in two different ways. First, and most commonly, the court can require a defendant to launch a corrective advertising campaign and to make an affirmative, correcting statement in that campaign.  Second, the courts can award a plaintiff monetary damages so that the plaintiff can conduct a corrective advertising campaign to counter the defendant's false advertisements.

3) Damages - To collect damages, the plaintiff generally has to show either that some consumers were actually deceived or that the defendant used the false advertising in bad faith.

 http://www.business.ftc.gov/documents/bus28-advertising-and-marketing-internet-rules-road
 http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/False+Advertising

4 comments:

  1. What would be some of the punishments or fines Costco had to pay for there false advertising? If they spend billions of dollars on advertising wouldn't you think they would avoid something like this, knowing they would get reprimanded? Or do you think they are such a large company they can pay the fines and move on?

    ReplyDelete
  2. To what extent do you guys think that consumers are protected against unwanted advertisements?
    I see that google eye is coming, and they have many cameras that not only can track your geo location, but also what you are specifically looking at.
    Any thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
  3. @Hannah I think they were being careless and were just trying to lure customers into the store by any means possible. It said that they used a "bait-and-switch" scheme to lure customers in the store because once they're in the store Costco sees that as their opportunity to make the sale. Costo had not commented on the lawsuit so it is hard to tell exactly what point they were trying to make by doing this. Tiffany's had filed a lawsuit against them earlier in the year as well for doing the same thing and Costco filed a counter-suit and I'm pretty sure no final decision has come to yet with that situation either. They either have some really good lawyers or just don't care/understand the wrongdoing of their actions!

    ReplyDelete
  4. @Rodolfo I don't believe consumers are very protected at all against unwanted advertisements simply because these businesses are paying to have these advertisements and you the consumer are continuing to use the resources in which they choose to advertise with. Rights of consumers exist and there are laws to protect them, but in a sense they are very limited when money becomes a factor. The whole Google eye is pretty crazy, but I mean when you think about it we technically are already being tracked we just don't realize it. Anything involving technology these days comes with risks and you risk the right to have your privacy invaded when using the Internet.

    ReplyDelete