
Joel N. Kreizman
Partner
732-568-8363 jkreizman@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Joel N. Kreizman
Date: March 20, 2015

Partner
732-568-8363 jkreizman@sh-law.comHowever, businesses looking to boost their online reviews with offers of compensation or other financial incentives could face legal action by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
In a recent enforcement action, the FTC charged a California shipping company with deceptive advertising after the company failed to disclose that it gave customers a $50 discount as long as they agreed to review AmeriFreight’s services. In addition, the company offered a $100 monthly prize for the review with the “most captivating subject line and best content.” In its defense, AmeriFreight maintained that customers were paid regardless of whether they posted negative or positive reviews.
The FTC was unpersuaded. As detailed in a recent FTC blog post:
In short, AmeriFreight encouraged customers to endorse the company with offers of discount payments and other incentives, and then advertised those positive reviews to lure prospective new customers to the company. The problem with this approach is that when it paid consumers to endorse the company, AmeriFreight was obligated to disclose those payments, but it didn’t. According to the FTC, this is deceptive.
According to the FTC, AmeriFreight ran afoul of the agency’s requirement that consumers have a right to know when there’s a material connection between an advertiser and an endorser. As stated in the FTC’s Endorsement Guidelines: “When there exists a connection between the endorser and the seller of the advertised product that might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement (i.e., the connection is not reasonably expected by the audience), such connection must be fully disclosed.”
AmeriFreight will not face any monetary sanctions for its violation. Rather, the FTC appears to be using the company to set an example. Under the terms of its settlement with AmeriFreight, the company is prohibited “from misrepresenting that any products or services are highly rated or top-ranked based on unbiased customers reviews or that their customer reviews are unbiased.” Going forward, the order also requires AmeriFreight to disclose material connections between its company and people who endorse its products or services.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!