The Bottom Line The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) have continued their commitment to protecting kids’ and teens’ digital privacy. In 2019, Google and YouTube paid what was then a record fine to the FTC and the New York Attorney General for violating Continue Reading
Score! College Athletes Will Soon Cash in on Their Name, Image and Likeness
7th Edition: Trends in Marketing Communications Law 2019 witnessed a landmark change in one of the most controversial matters plaguing college sports: the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) rule prohibiting student-athletes from accepting compensation for the use of their name, image Continue Reading
States Are Proposing Their Own CCPA-Like Privacy Laws
The Bottom Line Businesses that have just about come to terms with the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) may have more privacy rules and regulations to deal with going forward. Legislators in a number of other states across the country have recently proposed their own privacy bills. In Continue Reading
State Attorneys General Take the Reins in Policing Deceptive Advertising
6th Edition: Trends in Marketing Communications Law It can be easy to focus solely on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) when evaluating the regulatory landscape for advertising and marketing practices. But with the FTC still ramping up its new commissioners, who were sworn in between May and Continue Reading
The TTB Ramps Up Enforcement Over Trade Practices
6th Edition: Trends in Marketing Communications Law Over the past year, the United States Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) has substantially increased enforcement in the alcohol industry, indicating that increased regulatory scrutiny may be here to stay for alcohol manufacturers, Continue Reading
New York and Florida AGs Settle Charges with Seller of Fake Social Media Accounts and Engagements
The Bottom Line Brands, marketers, and their agencies typically have the most to lose due to fraudulent social media traffic, in the form of wasted marketing dollars spent appealing to non-existent users. However, these settlements made clear that such practices also harm consumers and social Continue Reading
First Circuit Requires Identifiable Injury for Claims Asserting Deceptive Retailer “Compare At” Prices
The Bottom Line Recent decisions from the First Circuit reign in consumers' ability to bring actions alleging false advertising in retailers' "Compare At" pricing, unless a consumer can demonstrate actual, identifiable harm separate from the mere purchase of a good in order to claim damages. Continue Reading