What We're Reading 6/29/2009

What We're Reading

Excite News: NY court hears Salinger's suit over spinoff book

An author who's being sued by J.D. Salinger for copyright infringement is asking a Manhattan judge to let his book be published.

 

Bloomberg: House Considering $37 Billion Drug Tax, Rangel Says (Update3)

The House is considering imposing a $37 billion tax on drugmakers by denying deductions for prescription-drug advertising, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel said.

 

Wall Street Journal: Lawmakers Blast Internet Data Collection

House Privacy Bill Would Give Consumers More Control Over Their Online Information

Internet companies came under fire on Capitol Hill on Thursday, with lawmakers questioning how well the companies protect information that they collect online about consumers for advertising purposes.

 

Excite News: FTC plans to monitor blogs for claims, payments

Savvy consumers often go online for independent consumer reviews of products and services, scouring through comments from everyday Joes and Janes to help them find a gem or shun a lemon.

 

Excite News: Obama, citing his smoking woes, signs tobacco law

Lamenting his first teenage cigarette, President Barack Obama ruefully admitted on Monday that he's spent his adult life fighting the habit. Then he signed the nation's toughest anti-smoking law, aiming to keep thousands of other teens from getting hooked.

Ninth Circuit Amends Barnes v. Yahoo Decision; Resolves Split as to Application of the Communications Decency Act

In the past two weeks, I’ve twice blogged about the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Barnes v. Yahoo. This case split the Ninth Circuit from other circuits as to how the CDA should be applied – should it support a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, or should it be treated as an affirmative defense? In deciding that the CDA was an affirmative defense, the Ninth Circuit created for itself a few problems. If the CDA is treated as an affirmative defense, then a court could open discovery prior to ruling on whether a defendant’s actions were immunized or not. By putting discovery into play, the cost of defending a case on CDA grounds could skyrocket. Thus, the CDA-as-an-affirmative-defense theory would create an incentive for defendants to settle cases for which they ought to receive protection, and create an incentive for plaintiffs to bring cases in the Ninth Circuit strictly for this reason. 

On June 22 (roughly six weeks after the release of the initial Barnes opinion), the Ninth Circuit issued an amended opinion in which it deleted the entire discussion of the CDA as an affirmative defense. This marks the second time in two years that the Ninth Circuit has had to go back and correct a decision about the CDA. But by making this correction, the Ninth Circuit resolves the split among the circuits as to whether the CDA can be used to support a 12(b)(6) motion. Thus, in the Ninth Circuit, the CDA can support a 12(b)(6) motion – for the moment, anyway.

If you want to read the full opinion, it can be found here

Why This Matters: Notwithstanding a future departure from the norm, the CDA can form the basis for a 12(b)(6) motion in the Ninth Circuit. This means that it is still possible to resolve a case on CDA grounds prior to the opening of discovery.

What We're Reading 6/22/2009

 What We're Reading

Wall Street Journal: Lawmakers Make Noise About Loud Commercials

Some members of Congress want broadcasters to turn down the volume on television commercials.

A bill sponsored by U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo (D., Calif.) would require the U.S. Federal Communications Commission to "preclude commercials from being broadcast at louder volumes than the program material they accompany."

 

Brandweek: Being Green More Valuable Than Price

Although some recent consumer research indicates that you’ll still need a crowbar to pry open the majority of shopper’s wallets, the ORC Guideline reports that many Americans are willing to part with their precious dollars to support eco-friendly initiatives.

 

Environmental Leader: Greenwashing Lawsuits, Climate Change Deception on the Rise

Lawyers, environmentalists and marketing groups say they’ve seen an increase in greenwashing suits over the past year, according to the National Law Journal. These groups are questioning everything from household cleaners to automobiles for their eco-friendliness.

 

CNET News: 'Spam king' could face criminal charges in Facebook case

In a move that could land Sanford Wallace in jail if convicted, a federal judge on Friday referred a lawsuit Facebook filed against the "spam king" to the U.S. Attorney's office for possible criminal proceedings.

 

NY Times: Tobacco Regulation Is Expected to Face a Free-Speech Challenge Top of Form 1

The marketing and advertising restrictions in the tobacco law that Congress passed last week are likely to be challenged in court on free-speech grounds. But supporters of the legislation say they drafted the law carefully to comply with the First Amendment.

 

NY Times: Microsoft Sues Three in Click-Fraud Scheme

AFTER an investigation that took more than a year, Microsoft has filed its first lawsuit over click fraud, where people manipulate clicks on a Web advertisement.

Reed Smith's Advertising, Technology, & Media Teleseminar: Facebook Personalized URLs - A Titanic Opportunity for Brands, or the Tip of an Iceberg?

Facebook announced last week the availability of a personalized Facebook URLs for individual profiles, e.g., www.facebook.com/[your name].

As discussed in our June 12 Client Alert, "Just When You Thought You Were Too Old for Facebook," this latest offering from Facebook raises serious issues—issues that are typically encountered when technology collides with traditional intellectual property laws intended to protect trademarks and brand names.

Much like the confusion and abuse that proliferated when cybersquatting became rampant over the ownership and administration of domain names, we now have social networks and service providers allowing users to generate content and offering customized http://www.thecompany.com/YOURNAMEHERE URLs within their own domains in a digital and borderless world.

Significantly, the promotional momentum created by Facebook's offer has caused every astute brand and trademark owner to ponder whether they should be in a rush to register their personalized URL on Facebook, or let it ride and deal with potential infringements when—and if—they occur!

While it can be stimulating to consider whether the intellectual property laws have kept up with the Internet, you need practical guidance and insightful approaches to these problems today. The Media & Entertainment Industry Team and the Advertising Technology & Media Law Group at Reed Smith have put together a teleseminar to help you understand the issues, formulate an approach, and make informed decisions. Join us for this informative one-hour teleseminar on Tuesday, June 23 at 12 p.m. EDT with partners Doug Wood and Joe Rosenbaum

UPDATE:  To view the seminar's PowerPoint presentation, please click here.

AFTRA and SAG TV Commercials - Late Night Waiver 2009 - 2012

AFTRA and SAG have extended the provisions of the Late Night Waiver for television commercials through March 31, 2012. The previous payment rates under this waiver have been increased by +4.43%.

A copy of the waiver and new payment rates can be found here

Can the CDA Support 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss? Ninth Circuit Says 'No'; New York District Court Says 'Yes.'

On May 28, I wrote about the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Barnes v. Yahoo. In that case, the Ninth Circuit held (among other things) that the Communications Decency Act (47 USC § 230) (“CDA”) could not support a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, because the CDA is an affirmative defense. As an affirmative defense, CDA protections must be claimed by filing an answer to the complaint, which can allow for the opening of discovery. Given that the opening of discovery can be expensive and time-consuming, it is not surprising that Yahoo has asked the Ninth Circuit for a rehearing en banc, and has received support from various amici briefs.

On the other side of the country, a New York District Court has tackled the same issue, but came to a different outcome. The case – Gibson v. Craigslist, 1:08-cv-07735-RMB (S.D.N.Y. June 15, 2009) – was brought by a shooting victim who claims that the shooter bought the gun via Craigslist. News reports on the case can be found here and here.

The basis of the case was the allegation that Craigslist had a duty to police its system so that "inherently dangerous objects" could not be purchased for use in criminal activities. Gibson sought $10 million in compensatory damages, punitive damages, and the "appointment of a federal monitor" to keep guns from being advertised on the website. 

In its defense, Craigslist submitted a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that the CDA precluded this kind of liability. In granting the 12(b)(6) motion, the court stated that "discovery into defendant’s efforts to prevent the sale of illegal goods on its website would not establish a set of facts that would entitle the Plaintiff to relief." Therefore, raising CDA immunity was more appropriate in a 12(b)(6) than raising it as an affirmative defense.

Why this Matters: As of today, there is a split in interpretation as to how CDA immunity should be claimed. For the Southern District of New York, as well as other courts like the Northern District of Texas [MCW, Inc. v. badbusinessbureau.com, 02-Civ.-2727 (N.D. Tex. April 19, 2004)], the CDA is properly raised in a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. If the motion is granted, this would preclude the opening of discovery. However, in the Ninth Circuit, the CDA should be treated as an affirmative defense to be raised in an answer. Thus, a judge may open discovery prior to ruling on the application of the CDA.

This split in application – if not resolved by the Ninth Circuit in an en banc rehearing – is likely to increase "forum shopping" among plaintiffs because, in the Ninth Circuit at least, plaintiffs would stand a better chance at a settlement. After all, a defendant may be more willing to settle a case than to risk the cost incurred in proceeding with discovery.

Vladeck's First Public Address Includes Priorities and Staff Changes

On June 18, 2009, 77 hours into his tenure as Bureau Chief for Consumer Protection, David Vladeck gave his first public address at the ABA Consumer Protection Conference, held at Georgetown University Law Center. He described himself as being "not part of the fraternity" of the FTC. He said that Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz reached out to him and expressed a desire for "fresh eyes." In his address, Vladeck suggested a set of agenda items that may be a hint of what his enforcement priorities will be.

  • Economic fraud will be a top priority – mortgage fraud, debt collection/debt consolidation, and other financial services scams.
  • Privacy – He stated that it is time to "take another look at privacy regulation." Vladeck said that the FTC has taken a "notice and consent" approach, and then moved to a "harm" approach. He said that these two approaches do not seem to address the issue comprehensively. He did not give much detail, but it is clear that there will be new ideas and approaches, reexamining assumptions about harm that is "unquantifiable."
  • Advertising, including behavioral marketing – Vladeck stressed a focus on how advertising affects those who are particularly vulnerable, including children. He also mentioned advertising of alcohol to teens. He made approving reference to the "disparate impact theory" that has been used in connection with some recent enforcement matters that have dealt with advertising targeted at Hispanic markets.
  • Legislative action – Vladeck said he expected that the Commission will be focused on its reauthorization, and with regard to President Obama's proposal concerning a new consumer protection body that will deal with financial products, Vladeck stressed that the FTC should be on "equal footing." Also, Vladeck stated that the FTC should have civil penalty authority as well as independent civil litigation authority. Thus, these may be additional agenda items.

In addition to these agenda items, on which he said he would keep "an aggressive pace," Vladeck announced some key personnel moves.

First, he announced that Chuck Harwood, Northwest Regional Director in Seattle, will be his Deputy Bureau Head. Harwood has been the regional director for 20 years. Prior to that he was a staff counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. According to our partner Anthony DiResta, formerly Harwood's counterpart in the Southeast Region, Harwood is an excellent choice, tough and fair.

Second, Peggy Twohig, Assistant Director for Financial Practices, will be leaving the Commission for a post at the U.S. Treasury Department. This appears to be a loss for the Commission and a huge pick-up for Treasury. Twohig has been a leading force against predatory lending practices, and it seemed from Vladeck's announcement that he was genuinely disappointed that he was losing her and her experience, especially in light of his top agenda concern.

Third, replacing Twohig will be long-time FTC lawyer Joel Winston, who currently is Associate Director for Privacy and Identity Protection. Extremely well regarded, Winston received the 2008 Presidential Rank Award of Meritorious Executive last fall, and was widely rumored to be under consideration for the Bureau Chief position.

Fourth, Jessica Rich, Assistant Director for Privacy and Identity Protection, will assume the role as Acting Associate Director.

Why This Matters: The Bureau Chief for Consumer Protection at the FTC sets policy and tone for the consumer protection side of the Commission. The Vladeck era has begun, and we can see that he will bring a fresh perspective. He has never served at the FTC. He has sued the FTC ("successfully," he added). His agenda seems to have two central substantive interests: financial fraud and privacy. Although this was somewhat expected given his background, one gets the sense that he is going to pursue mortgage fraud and other types of financial services fraud very aggressively, and will be particularly interested in any sort of practice that targets those who have been disparately impacted by the economic downturn. The changes in the personnel in both the financial and privacy divisions are interesting in light of the importance both of these divisions are likely to have for the foreseeable future. Finally, by all accounts, the selection of Harwood is a positive move that may have the side benefit of giving Vladeck insight into the activities and utility of the regional offices.

New Posts on Adlaw by Request

It is our pleasure to present you with our June 2009 mid-month Adlaw by Request (ABR) update. Inside ABR, you'll find a strong collection of articles that address several recent developments in the world of advertising and marketing. Leading with Facebook's decision to grant certain members the right to reserve registered trademarks on its platform and the many important implications associated with that decision, you'll also read about blogger liability, do's and don'ts in "green" advertising --including some added clarity on the FTC's Green Guides and you'll get access to a PowerPoint presentation that was recently given by Reed Smith in partnership with the JPC regarding SAG/AFTRA contracts.

Once again, we encourage your feedback, questions and recommendations -- this is a blog after all. Also, if there is an issue or topic that you would like addressed on our blog, please let us know.  We start taking requests after 9:00 pm EST.

Our next communication is just a couple weeks away, but definitely come back and visit before then.

Warm regards,

Adam Snukal
Editor-In-Chief

Tags:

The FTC Takes on Environmental Marketing Claims Through Green Guides and More

On June 9, 2009, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”) testified on its efforts to ensure truthfulness of environmental or “green” marketing claims before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Noting the “virtual tsunami” of environmental marketing, the FTC announced it will continue its efforts to ensure that green advertisements are “truthful, substantiated, and not confusing to consumers.” 

In order to protect consumers from unfair or deceptive practices, the FTC explained its multi-tiered approach of (1) issuing rules and guides for businesses, (2) challenging fraudulent and deceptive ads through enforcement actions, and (3) publishing materials to help consumers make informed purchasing decisions. 

The FTC’s Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims (“Green Guides” or “Guides”), 16 C.F.R. Part 260, are the centerpiece of the agency’s environmental marketing program, according to the testimony. The Green Guides, first issued in 1992 and most recently revised in 1998, help advertisers avoid making “unfair or deceptive” claims in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”) by describing the basic elements needed to substantiate specific environmental claims. While the Guides “provide the basis for voluntary compliance” with section 5 of the FTC Act, “[c]onduct inconsistent with the positions articulated . . . may result in corrective action by the Commission under Section 5 if, after investigation, the Commission has reason to believe that the behavior falls within the scope of the conduct declared unlawful by the statute.” § 260.1.

Continue Reading...

What We're Reading 6/16/2009

What We're Reading

Reuters: US warns of TV drug ads' distracting music, images

Television ads for drugs and medical devices should avoid distracting images and music that can reduce viewers' comprehension of potential side effects, U.S. regulators advised in guidelines proposed on Tuesday.

 

Broadcasting & Cable: Senate Launches Investigation Of Deceptive Online Marketing

Commerce Committee looking into "mystery charges" on Web surfers' credit cards

Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (WVA) has launched an investigation into an online marketing practice he says results in "mystery charges" on Web surfers credit cards.

 

NY Times: Cigarettes in Popular Films Are Target of Health Groups

The advocacy arm of the American Medical Association unveiled a summer-long campaign on Wednesday intended to publicly shame movie studios for depicting images of smoking in their mass-appeal movies.

 

Excite News: Minn. regulators drop bid to block online gambling

Minnesota regulators have withdrawn a request that Internet service providers block access to hundreds of online gambling sites.

 

Brandweek: Senate Passes Bill for FDA to Regulate Tobacco

In a 79-17 vote yesterday, the U.S. Senate passed a bill giving the Food and Drug Administration regulatory authority over the tobacco industry.

The vote sends the measure back to the House, which passed a similar version in April. If the House accepts the Senate version, then the bill would go directly to President Barack Obama, who supports the action. (Note: another industry media outlet reported the bill was on its way to the President already.)

SAG and AFTRA 2009 TV and Radio Agreements - Revised Rate Charts

Revised SAG 2009 TV Commercials and AFTRA 2009 RADIO Commercials rate charts are available.

These rate charts have been revised to reflect minor rounding corrections to the previously issued documents. You will also find some additional explanations/clarifications based on questions we have been receiving from members.

The AFTRA TV 2009 Rate Charts are identical to the SAG TV 2009 Rate Charts and will be posted separately. 

Just When You Thought You're Too Old for Facebook

Earlier today, you may have received numerous memos from law firms and bloggers anxious to respond to the announcement by Facebook that Facebook is allowing trademark owners to notify Facebook of their IP rights through use of a special electronic form. The purpose is to allow trademark owners to record their IP rights in advance of Facebook allowing its users to register personalized Facebook URLs. While we applaud advising clients and friends of issues, we think the matter is considerably more complicated than previous briefs and hasty reports may indicate. As is so often the case, the devil is in the detail and this memorandum provides a deeper look at the process and related issues before undertaking Facebook’s new program to record trademark.

Facebook Announcement

On Tuesday, June 9, Facebook, Inc., the popular social networking website, announced that on Saturday, June 13th at 12:01 a.m. U.S. EDT, it will allow Facebook users, subject to certain criteria and qualifications, to create personalized URLs for their pages on Facebook. By way of example, John Smith will be able to register "Facebook.com/johnsmith." Currently, a user’s Facebook URL consists of the Facebook.com URL followed by a random series of numbers, e.g., facebook.com/profiles.Php?349485).

Whenever users can register any name on the Internet, however, it raises infringement issues under federal and state trademark and related intellectual property laws, particularly for owners of well know brands. Any registration process creates fears of cybersquatting or other attempts to hijack trademarks and brand names. Sometimes these fears are real; other times they are not.

Continue Reading...

Bloggers Beware

As we’ve discussed previously on Adlaw by Request, the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") is in the process of revising its Endorsement and Testimonial Policies and Guidelines – the first set of revisions since 1980. In addition to compelling greater disclosure and substantiation on advertisers that wish to employ endorsements and testimonials in their advertising, the FTC has cast its net to include blogs, message boards and street teams among those parties that would be subject to these new enactments. The purpose of this article is to address the effect such guidelines will have on blogs.

By way of introduction, endorsements refers to any advertising message (including verbal statements, demonstrations or depictions of the name, signature, likeness, or any other identifying personal characteristic of an individual or the name/seal of an organization) that consumers are likely to believe reflects the opinions, findings or experience of an independent party other than the advertiser about a particular product. The FTC has expressed its intention to treat endorsements and testimonials identically in the context of its review and enforcement activities.

Generally speaking, endorsements: (i) must reflect the honest opinions, findings, beliefs or experiences of the endorser, (ii) may not convey an express or implied representation that would be deceptive if made by the actual advertiser, (iii) may not be presented out of context or worded so as to distort in any way the endorser’s opinion or experience with the advertised product, and (iv) may only be communicated by endorsers who are bona fide users of the product at the time of the endorsement, and the endorsement may continue to run so long as the advertiser has good reason to believe that the endorser remains a bona fide user of the product. From a liability perspective, both advertisers and endorsers alike can be held liable on the basis of false or unsubstantiated statements made through endorsements.

Although liability from false endorsements can arise from several different scenarios within the context of blogs, the two most common developments are likely the following: (i) blogger reviews, and (ii) undisclosed payments made by advertisers to bloggers. In the first scenario, bloggers are continually on a mission to find new content about which to write, and advertisers are constantly seeking innovative and organic means by which to disseminate their messages. For a blogger to write a review about a particular product on his/her blog, the blogger will be deemed an "endorser" by the FTC. Therefore, should the blogger fail to verify (or request verification of) an advertiser’s substantiation with respect to any product claims, the advertiser can be subject to liability for false and unsubstantiated statements made through the blogger’s endorsement, and the blogger may also be subject to liability for the same unsubstantiated representations (intentional or unintentional) made in the course of his/her review (aka endorsement).

The second potential pitfall involves a blogger’s failure to clearly and conspicuously disclose any payments (in cash or in goods) that he/she receives from an advertiser. Especially in those situations in which a blogger is neither an expert, nor is known to a significant portion of the viewing public/ readership but receives some form of payment from the advertiser, this fact must be disclosed to the public. The FTC’s reasoning behind this disclosure requirement should be fairly obvious – receipt of consideration by the blogger will likely have a material effect on the credibility that the public ascribes to the endorsement. As mentioned above, the payment/consideration can take the form of cash, free or discounted goods (even for testing purposes), gift certificates, or even advertising revenues on the blog, itself.

So, what is an advertiser to do that wants to enlist the services of bloggers? The answer involves training and monitoring. Advertisers must provide their bloggers with training on the do’s and don’ts of endorsements and claims, making sure that each claim is truthful and substantiated. For those bloggers who regularly receive consideration in some form or another, advertisers must closely monitor their blogs and have clearly defined policies in place that set forth the steps by which deceptive advertising must be halted and immediately taken down, when discovered. Lastly, and particularly for bloggers who are receiving payment in some form or another, advertisers should consider developing a reasonably simple but focused set of terms and conditions and/or an actual agreement/insertion order that lays out the obligations of the blogger, and the risk allocations should a problem arise.

… as for the bloggers, one approach to address the payment disclosure requirement is to bifurcate sections of their blog between a paid advertising area and an editorial (i.e., non-paid advertising) area. So long as a user knows at all times in which of the two "areas" he/she is situated, bloggers (and advertisers, by extension) can get some level of comfort that their disclosure requirements have been satisfied. The objective, simply put, is to convey transparency to the consumer. This point was recently encapsulated by Jory Des Jardins, Co-Founder of BlogHer: "It's time to look at the finer distinctions between compensated programs that have emerged as social media enters awkward adolescence. To us, the question is not whether anyone should ever compensate bloggers, it's under what circumstances should you compensate them? And if you do compensate them, what are your obligations, and theirs?"

While the FTC isn’t expected to roll out its new Endorsement and Testimonial Policies until later this summer, advertisers and bloggers must start to think about these issues and put policies and documents into effect that address them. Consult your local advertising and marketing attorney for further assistance.

Seminar on New SAG/AFTRA Radio and Television Commercials Contracts

On June 8 and 9, the JPC and Reed Smith held seminars/webinars on the new agreements with SAG and AFTRA. Click here to review the PowerPoint presentation. Please note the correction on the Extra Allowance from $5.74 to $5.75 for laptops, PDA's and similar devices.

Click here to listen to day two's presentation.

What We're Reading 6/8/2009

What We're Reading

BuisinessWeek: Blogola: The FTC Takes On Paid Posts

The Federal Trade Commission wants bloggers to disclose when they've been wooed with cash or freebies from companies they cover

This summer, the government agency is expected to issue new advertising guidelines that will require bloggers to disclose when they're writing about a sponsor's product and voicing opinions that aren't their own. The new FTC guidelines say that blog authors should disclose when they're being compensated by an advertiser to discuss a product.

 

Environmental Leader: Bottled Water Firms Sue NY over “Bottle Bill”

Recycling advocacy groups met recently to push a bill to expand the five-cent bottle deposit in New York State to include non-carbonated beverages and sports drinks. Now a coalition of bottled water companies is suing New York to block the expanded bottle deposit law scheduled to take effect next month, arguing that the law, which imposes a deposit fee on bottled water sold in New York State, is unconstitutional, reports the New York Times.

 

Excite News: Cigarette makers lose appeal in landmark case

A federal appeals court on Friday agreed with the major elements of a 2006 landmark ruling that found the nation's top tobacco companies guilty of racketeering and fraud for deceiving the public about the dangers of smoking.

 

Excite News: SAG, AFTRA approve ads contract

Three-year deal ratified by landslide vote

SAG and AFTRA members have given overwhelming approval to a three-year commercials contract with a 93.8% endorsement -- a marked contrast with the current bitter battle within SAG over the feature-primetime contract.

FAQs on Commercial Service Fee

Douglas Wood, JPC Lead Negotiator, answers questions from the advertising community on the new Commercial Service Fee.