FTC's Rule Banning Fake Online Reviews Goes Into Effect (apnews.com) 32
A federal rule banning fake online reviews is now in effect. The Federal Trade Commission issued the rule in August banning the sale or purchase of online reviews. The rule, which went into effect Monday, allows the agency to seek civil penalties against those who knowingly violate it. AP: "Fake reviews not only waste people's time and money, but also pollute the marketplace and divert business away from honest competitors," FTC Chair Lina Khan said about the rule in August. She added that the rule will "protect Americans from getting cheated, put businesses that unlawfully game the system on notice, and promote markets that are fair, honest, and competitive."
Next law? Disclosure if been given a free sample? (Score:2)
Is there a law that requires reviewers to disclose if they have been sponsored or been given a free sample by the company?
The better YouTubers disclose this information but it seems like this is not mandatory?
Re: Next law? Disclosure if been given a free samp (Score:2)
Free sample of sugarfree Haribo gummy bears?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not a bad FP, but it's serious and I think this story is rich with potential Funny.
Too bad I can't write funny. There must be something in my reviews on Google Maps...
Re: (Score:3)
The FTC has a whole website on this. If the reviewer is formally Sponsored they must disclose it.
Gifts are more of a gray area. The reviewer likely does Not have to disclose that the company lent them the sample they are reviewing.
On the other hand if the company says to them "you can have the product", then now they are receiving compensation, and that should be disclosed.
A
Re: (Score:2)
does this mean (Score:3)
does this mean, companies can now claim poor reviews are fake and retaliate using the law?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
does this mean, companies can now claim poor reviews are fake and retaliate using the law?
Not necessarily, but it certainly means they will use the law as a battering ram against negative reviews. I imagine a form letter along the lines of, "We will forward your $negative review to the FTC for further investigation. To avoid this action, please remove the review within 48 hours of receipt of this letter."
The key is in the wording (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
wasn't fraud already illegal? (Score:2)
wasn't fraud already illegal? please forgive my ignorance, but how is this different? did they need to put a separate law on the books because reviews fall under freedom of speech?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes - but determining what is and isn't fraud on a case by case basis is really a lot of work. That's why we established the FTC to help produce rules as a guide for enforcement. They make the determination for the general case and then actual crimes are categorized based on the rules.
Fraud can go anywhere. Just because you stuff it into a review doesn't suddenly make it safe.
Re: (Score:2)
Going after consumers? (Score:2)
It seems like they're also targeting the consumer side of these schemes. I know a lot of people are doing it semi-professionally. But a lot is a "free gift if you give us a review" note in an order package and people won't know the law.
Hitting the consumer with fines as an end-run around not being able to easily target international sellers selling on Amazon seems a bit much. And probably will hurt relatively "innocent" people more than anyone else.
what about satire? (Score:2)
I recall laughing uproariously at the mother of teenage boys' review of the toilette paper, and the mans' review of the Nair hair remover.
The issue is that they can't legislate intelligence, so we have to put up with this type of bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The rule bans sale or purchase of reviews. People making fun of things usually aren't getting paid.
What if you get paid in laughs? Can they fine you laughs? Will I develop a laugh deficit? OH NO!
Criminals ignore laws and rules. (Score:2)
Criminals ignore laws in rules.
This is why gun control is such a sham -- sure, the "law abiding" have their arms tied and have to jump through hoops to enjoy a Constitutionally-protected right, but the criminals who do crime with guns are not following any of these laws. They get what they want, when they want. Laws do *nothing* to stop them, but it sure makes good PR doesn't it?
This is the same. This "rule" or "law" will not deter or stop people from putting in fake reviews.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Can you murder me over the internet from another country? False equivalence is false.
Re: Criminals ignore laws and rules. (Score:2)
It's called a drone strike
Fake? (Score:2)
Define "fake" please.
If the rule isn't specific, it will be abused by the bigger stronger companies with the best lawyers.
BTW, this is a fake review of the FTC rule. Sue me.
Re: Fake? (Score:2)
Were you paid to express that view?
Useless (Score:2)
How does this combat teams of people from non-US countries that actually do this work?
This does not stop individual schizoposting, which is a good thing.
Problem not solved.
Won't this just get struck down (Score:2)
I don't think we've really seen the full effects of that yet and I don't think we will until after the election when it's too late to do anything about it. Which I think is also kind of the point.
rules (Score:1)
My review - 1 out 5 stars (Score:2)
New law my ass (Score:2)