Advertising Law: A Plain Language Guide for Businesses and NonProfits

Creating and publishing advertisements helps get the word out on your business, product, or services. But ads can create legal liability from individual consumers or government regulators. So, how do you advertise in a way that avoids trouble with state or federal law?

In this guide, we’ll discuss key advertising laws and regulations as they apply to a wide range of industries. This guide was made with businesses in mind looking to comply with federal and state advertising regulations. We hope this guide jumpstarts conversations on how your business runs ads or how your business will modify ads to better comply with advertising regulations.

Table of Contents

o What do businesses need to look out for with federal laws when making and publishing advertisements about my product, services, or business?

Disclaimer: This Guide is Not a Substitute for Legal Advice

This guide is not a substitute for advice from a lawyer because each person’s case is different. A guide like this can only provide general information about advertising laws relevant to certain situations. Given the changing nature of advertising laws and regulations, keep in mind that this information might change from time to time.

Because each business’ advertising needs are different, the wide range of advertising situations cannot be fully covered in this limited guide. This guide is not a proper substitute for legal advice directly tailored to a business’s or individual’s advertising needs. This guide was created by practicing attorneys licensed in the state of California. If you have specific questions about local advertising regulations outside of California, you may want to seek local counsel in your area.

That said, we understand how difficult and confusing it can be to know what advertisements can and cannot say under federal and state regulations. We also know that it might not be feasible to hire a lawyer to understand current advertising regulations. So, we’ve drafted this guide to get you started on learning about advertising law.

Before we get into what federal laws might apply to your situation, it’s helpful to understand advertising basics about when an advertising claim is made. An advertising claim is a direct or implied promise of a benefit or value from a product or service that can be objectively measured, evaluated, and proven. Claims can be verbal, visual, or implied by tone, mood, or situation.

Claims can be found in what a business says and suggests about its products or services. Any communication directed at consumers about a business’s products or services may have advertising claims. Claims can be found in advertisements, product packaging, marketing and promotional materials, press releases or other publicity materials, point-of-purchase displays, websites, social media platforms, mobile applications, and more.

Advertising claims can be either express or implied:

· Express claims are statements or depictions of a product or service that are plain or direct.

· Implied claims are statements or depictions of a product or service that are indirect.

EXAMPLE: Express or Implied Claims

Imagine packaging for a toothpaste brand has two claims: (1) the toothpaste kills bacteria that causes cavities, and (2) the toothpaste prevents cavities. The first claim is an implied claim because it implies that it will help prevent cavities. The second claim is an express claim because the packaging plainly and directly states that the toothpaste prevents cavities.

Regardless of whether claims are express or implied, it’s important to look at a product or service’s advertised claims in their entirety rather than in isolation. If the advertisement can be reasonably interpreted in multiple ways, each reasonable interpretation must be true. As you review applicable laws and regulations that may concern your type of advertising, keep these general considerations in mind when deciding how best to move forward with how you conduct advertising.

Federal laws that apply to advertising

While there may be differences in state and local regulations on advertising depending on where you’re located, there are a few federal laws and regulations that control the advertising landscape. These include the following:

· The Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC Act)

· The Federal Communications Commission Act (FCC Act)

· Section 43(a) of the Lanham Trademark Act (Lanham Act)

· Self-Regulatory Principles for Online Behavioral Advertising

What do businesses need to look out for with federal laws when making and publishing advertisements about my products, services, or business?

Several factors go into considering what you can and cannot do with advertisements. Generally, advertisements are governed by a combination of federal, state, and local laws. Each of these regulations take into account different considerations and do not necessarily apply to all kinds of advertisements for all kinds of products, services, and businesses. We’ll briefly provide an overview of some of the important federal regulations, but if you have specific questions, feel free to reach out to New Media Rights.

(1) The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Act

The Bottom Line: Ads must be truthful and non-deceptive, fair, and substantiated. Context is key when determining whether an ad is deceptive under the FTC Act. Failing to include important information can leave the wrong impression about your product. Using appropriate disclosures, having evidence to back up claims, and focusing on the overall impression that an ad conveys are all important steps to take to avoid deception.

Generally, the FTC Act prohibits unfair or deceptive advertising in any medium. Similarly, any claim in advertising must be supported by, or substantiated, with the appropriate kinds of evidence to back up an advertisement’s claim.

Ads Must Be Truthful and Non-deceptive

Under federal truth in advertising law, false and deceptive advertisements are prohibited, regardless of how those ads are shared with the public. An advertisement is deceptive if it has a statement or omits information that is likely to mislead reasonable consumers, and that statement or omission is “material” (i.e., important to a consumer’s decision to purchase).

The FTC typically considers claims material if they significantly involve health, safety or other areas with which a reasonable consumer would be concerned. For example, the FTC has found information to be material when it concerns the purpose, safety, effectiveness, or cost of the product. This means that whenever you are explicitly conveying important information about a product or service, you must avoid misleading consumers or leaving out any information that a consumer or user might think is important to know before purchasing your product or service.

The failure to include important information can leave consumers with the wrong impression about your product. For example, if a company advertised a collection of books, the ad would be deceptive if it did not disclose that consumers were actually receiving the abridged versions of the books.

A key point to remember about deception is that an advertiser does not have to actually deceive a consumer in order for the advertising to be considered deceptive. In other words, a consumer does not actually have to show that they were deceived. Rather, the company only needs to have the tendency and capacity (ability) to deceive.

Context is essential in determining whether an advertisement is deceptive; the FTC will generally look at what the ad conveys overall rather than any particular word or phrase.

Ads Must Be Fair

The FTC act prohibits unfair advertisements in any medium. An advertisement is considered unfair if it (1) causes or is likely to cause substantial consumer injury (2) that the consumer could not reasonably avoid (meaning that there was no way to avoid the injury), and (3) that injury is not outweighed by the product or advertisement’s benefit to consumers. In most cases, “substantial injury” includes monetary loss/harm, or unnecessary health and safety risks. If the injury outweighs the benefit, the ad is likely to be unfair.

Ads Must Be Substantiated

Advertised claims about a product or service must be substantiated. This means that any claims made about a product or service need to have proof to back up those claims. The best practice is to have a reasonable basis for making the claim before you even make it (in other words, the claim should be substantiated before sharing the ad with the public. If an advertisement alleges to back up its claim with a particular level of support (such as laboratory test or studies), the advertiser must possess that evidence.

Take the earlier toothpaste example. If the toothpaste company puts an ad on tv that states that their toothpaste “prevents cavities,” that would be an express claim for which the company must have proof to back up. Even implied claims like “this toothpaste kills the bacteria that cause cavities” require proof to back up the statements. Although the ad does not literally state that it helps prevent cavities, by inference, a reasonable consumer could logically conclude that by killing the bacteria that cause cavities, the toothpaste would prevent cavities.

Ads Must Have Proper Disclosures

When an ad makes express or implied claims that are likely to be misleading without certain qualifying information, the information must be shared (i.e., “disclosed”). A disclosure cannot be used to “fix” a false claim. Rather, it can only be used to help qualify or limit the claim so that you can avoid a misleading impression. Often, disclosures consist of a word or phrase that may be easily incorporated into the text, along with the claim.

For example, an online product listing for “Imitation Pearl Necklace” is a simple, but clear and conspicuous disclosure about the type of pearl necklace being sold. The disclosure word “imitation” preceding the word “pearl” keeps consumer expectations in check by explaining the nature of the pearls themselves. If a disclosure provides information that contradicts a material claim, the disclosure will not be sufficient to prevent the ad from being deceptive. For example, if the online ad says it’s an “authentic pearl necklace,” but the disclosure says that the pearl is man-made, then that contradicting disclosure would not prevent the ad from being deceptive.

The goal for any required disclosure is to be clear and conspicuous. Whether a disclosure is clear and conspicuous depends on how consumers actually perceive and understand the disclosure within the context of the entire ad. The “overall net impression” –whether the claims consumers take from the ad are truthful and substantiated—is the key to a clear and conspicuous disclosure. So, disclosures that are not visible or understood by the consumer cannot hope to correct potentially misleading claims, because they wouldn’t change the overall impression.

How and where to place appropriate disclosures will depend heavily on the nature of the ad and what a reasonable consumer would take away from an ad, even if the consumer did not read every detail. Advertisers should draw attention to a disclosure if the disclosure is particularly important for the consumer to understand. For a disclosure to be effectively communicated, disclosures should be placed as closely as possible to the representations the disclosures are meant to modify. For example, a disclosure placed randomly on an advertisement (or where a consumer might not find it) would not be a clear and conspicuous disclosure. Some factors to consider in creating a clear and conspicuous disclosure include:

· the placement of the disclosure in the advertisement and its proximity to the claim it is qualifying;

· the prominence of the disclosure;

· whether the disclosure is unavoidable;

· the extent to which items in other parts of the advertisement might distract attention from the disclosure;

· whether the disclosure needs to be repeated several times in order to be effectively communicated, or because consumers may enter the site at different locations or travel through the site on paths that cause them to miss the disclosure;

· whether disclosures in audio messages are presented in an adequate volume and cadence and visual disclosures appear for a sufficient duration; and

· whether the language of the disclosure is understandable to the intended audience.

When it’s not possible to place a disclosure in close proximity to a certain claim that might be considered deceptive, advertisers can either modify the original claim so it can no longer be interpreted as misleading (because at that point a disclosure wouldn’t be necessary) or not use the advertisement at all. For more information on disclosures in the online setting, please visit the Disclosures in the Online Advertising Space section.

(2) Section 43(a) of the Lanham Trademark Act (Lanham Act)

The Bottom Line: Ads and business practices should not be deceptive or confuse consumers. Changing products, services, trademarks, branding and advertisements due to trademark infringement claims and other claims under the Lanham Act is expensive, and can lead to the loss of business relationships and high legal costs to defend a lawsuit. It’s important to consider branding and trademark decisions upfront to make sure that consumers won’t be confused about your company, products, and practices.

Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act is a statute designed to guard against unfair competition claims such as unregistered trademark infringement, false advertising, false designation of origin, and false endorsement. The Act primarily prevents deceptive conduct that causes consumer confusion, and deceptive commercial advertising. Individual consumers cannot sue under this section of the Lanham Act. Only parties that are typically “engaged in interstate commerce” (meaning that they are buying and selling products/services across the country) or whose competitive or commercial interests have been harmed. This means that typically a business would bring this type of claim against (most likely) another business or person selling goods and services.

Unregistered Trademark Infringement

Under the Lanham Act, a trademark can be any word, name, symbol, or device (or some combination of these items) used by a person or used to distinguish an individual’s products or services from others in the marketplace. Generally, there are three categories of trademarks:

(1) trademarks & service marks (which indicate the source/origin of goods and distinguishes those goods from the goods of others),

(2) trade names (the name under which a business entity conducts business), and

(3) trade dress (refers to the total image and overall appearance of a product).

Trademarks serve a variety of important functions, such as identifying a product’s source, ensuring the consistent quality of goods and services, and protecting consumers from confusion. For example, when you go to your local grocery store and purchase a 2-liter bottle filled with a caramel-colored soft drink labeled with a mark of “Coca Cola,” you recognize the soft drink is made by the producers of Coca Cola Company, and you can trust that the liquid inside the bottle will have the same taste and quality that comes with purchasing a bottle of Coca Cola from the Coca Cola Company. But when a trademark fails to indicate a single source, such as when suppliers use similar marks, it may cause confusion among consumers.

While there is no established method of guarding against consumer confusion when advertising your product or service, the key inquiry for trademark infringement is whether the use of a mark is likely to confuse consumers about the product or service’s affiliation, connection, or association between two parties.

EXAMPLE: Confusion About Product Affiliation, Connection, or Association

Assume amateur game developer Greg made an app that was essentially a library of a variety of computer games that can be played on an Apple computer from a single app. Greg named his app “Apple Games” since it was an app that could be used to play games on an Apple computer. Greg puts Apple Games on the marketplace. Chad, a consumer, finds Greg’s product and purchases Apple Games because he believed Apple Games was an app created and developed by Apple.

Here, there is a strong likelihood Greg infringed on Apple’s trademark because by naming his app “Apple Games” it caused confusion among consumers about the company that the product was associated with. Naming Greg’s product “Apple Games caused consumers (like Chad) to believe that his product was associated with Apple, an established technology company, instead of Greg, an amateur game developer.

Another factor to consider when determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion is whether there is consumer confusion about a product or service’s origin, sponsorship, or approval of the goods or services.

EXAMPLE: Confusion Regarding Product Origin, Sponsorship, or Approval

Let’s say that Greg was also working on a new electronic accessory for Apple iPhones. When Greg was ready to launch his product, he made sure to include the “Made for iPhone” logo on the packaging of his product to convey to consumers the product was designed for iPhones. But, unknown to Greg, the “Made for iPhone” logo can only be used after going through Apple’s special licensing and certification program. Greg’s unauthorized use of the logo may cause consumers to assume that Apple has given its stamp of approval to the accessory. This is an example of confusion about a product’s origin, sponsorship, and approval because using the logo communicates to consumers that the accessory has been designed to connect specifically to iPhone, and has been certified by the developer to meet Apple performance standards, when in fact, it has not.

Depending on the jurisdiction, courts will generally look to a list of several factors to evaluate the likelihood of consumer confusion:

Keep these factors in mind as you look to advertise your product or service. When you have a specific mark, design, or logo that you would like to incorporate into how you advertise your products or services, it may be worth assessing your risk exposure to potential trademark infringement claims with a local trademark attorney. A trained attorney with experience in trademark law can help advise you on the potential risks involved with your mark relating to your specific situation. It’s worth it to hire an attorney to do this work upfront. Changing products, services, branding and advertisements due to infringement is expensive. Loss of business relationships and legal costs to defend a lawsuit are also expensive.

While you can get creative with how you advertise a product or service, you cannot get away with making false advertising claims related to another person’s products or services. False advertising can take form in any statement, word, symbol, description, or device in a commercial advertisement that conveys a false or misleading message to consumers about the nature, qualities, characteristics, or geographic origin of another person’s goods or services.

False advertising claims apply to commercial advertisements. Generally, a statement is considered to be commercial advertising if it involves commercial speech (speech made to influence the purchasing decisions of the consuming public), influences consumers to purchase a certain good or use certain services, and is disseminated sufficiently to the purchasing public (the “dissemination requirement”).

Commercial advertisements consist of more than just widespread advertising campaigns. The dissemination requirement depends on the typical level of dissemination in the relevant industry and market. Disseminating information to a small number of customers in a relatively small industry may be seen as a commercial advertisement whereas dissemination to a small number of customers in a larger market is not a commercial advertisement.

False or misleading advertisements can be literal or implied. To determine whether a message is false or misleading, courts typically focus on two questions:

1. Does the message have a verifiable, factual statement OR a non-factual opinion or “puffery”?

2.Does the degree of ambiguity AND truthfulness of the message lend itself to a finding of consumer deception?

Both of these factors require a fact-specific analysis depending on the nature of the commercial advertisement, but we offer a few helpful tips as you evaluate the message of your commercial advertisement across these factors. If the statement is a non-factual opinion or puffery, then the analysis generally stops at question one because puffery is generally not considered to be misleading. “Puffery” statements are generally statements that no reasonable buyer would view as statements of objectively true fact, and that generally boast about the qualities or characteristics of a product or service. Puffery statements generally do not make any specific claims, or are so exaggerated that it is unlikely that consumers would rely on the statement to make a decision as to whether to purchase. Take for example KFC’s slogan of “finger lickin’ good.” The statement simply highlights the delicious flavor of its food, and no reasonable buyer would accept this statement as an objectively true fact.

WARNING: The Fine Line of “Puffery” – Avoid Statements That Can Be Fact-Checked Through Testing

Generally, businesses should avoid any specific statements of qualities or superiority that can be fact-checked through testing. The courts found the following examples of advertising claims DO NOT constitute puffery (and were ultimately misleading) because the claims were capable of being measured:

False advertising claims also require a showing of deception unless the statement is literally false. Depending on the jurisdiction, courts may require proof that the statement actually deceived consumers or simply had a tendency to deceive consumers. Regardless, a showing of deception will require proof of how consumers actually do react (not how consumers are likely to react). This can be established with a survey sent to consumers. Other persuasive evidence of actual deception might also be acceptable to a court.

NOTE: Literally False Statements

A statement is literally false if the statement is reasonably interpreted as a statement of objective fact, specific and measurable, and capable of being proven false. A statement that can be reasonably interpreted in multiple ways cannot be literally false. Similarly, if the statement is implied, merely suggestive, or requires the consumer to draw a conclusion, it is not literally false.

EXAMPLE: Pizza Hut vs. Papa Johns

In 1995, popular pizza chain Papa Johns adopted the phrase “better ingredients, better pizza” as their brand slogan. Papa John’s found itself in hot water when the pizza chain used a national advertising campaign to suggest consumers preferred the taste of Papa John’s pizza when compared to Pizza Hut pizzas. One of the advertisements in the campaign stated that Papa John’s “won big time” in taste tests over Pizza Hut. Other advertisements claimed Papa John’s sauce and dough were better than Pizza Hut’s because they were made with fresh tomatoes and filtered water.

Pizza Hut claimed Papa John’s engaged in deceptive advertising in violation of federal advertising law by arguing customers relied on Papa John’s slogan to base their pizza-buying decision. Although a jury found Papa John’s claims of better sauce and dough were false or misleading, the federal court of appeals said the jurors were never asked if consumers relied on Papa’s John’s “better” claims when deciding what pizza to buy. Although Papa John’s did not have to pay Pizza Hut any damages, Papa John’s did have to engage in a years-long battle against one of its fiercest competitors.

It is also unclear how much of the relevant population would need to be actually deceived. The exact number will depend on the jurisdiction, but courts generally hold that a 15% deception rate of the relevant population being deceived is sufficient for false advertising claims.

EXAMPLE: False Advertising Based on False or Misleading Statements

Some examples of false advertising might look like any of the following. Note these examples assume the statements are false or misleading: