Barry Benjamin
Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton
With social media posts often heavy with sponsored adverts, Barry Benjamin of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton explains how brands can ensure they are compliant with new consumer protection rules in this area

What does a sponsored advert look like on social media and how does the FTC come into it?

Many different ways to communicate now exist—blogs, videos and so on—where ‘influencers’ present their opinions to the public. The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is concerned mostly with situations where the consumer does not know that an advertiser is behind the message or communication in some way.

There are situations where ‘influencers’ receive free goods from an advertiser, to induce the influencer to talk about the advertiser’s product or services in a social media context. Brands will send the influencer products and they will comment on their own or on the brand’s respective Twitter/Instagram page, typically saying something positive about the brand and product. But there’s no guarantees: the implicit exchange between the advertiser and the influencer is that if the influencer has a poor experience with the product, they will not write a post, nor a mention via social media. The influencer simply won’t issue a negative review, because if they do, they know that that ‘gravy train’ of free products from the advertiser will stop.

The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) says that the brand-influencer relationship is something that should be factored in to the consumer’s evaluation of the influencer’s message—the consumer has a right to know about the material connection between the influencer and the brand.

It’s not always money, and there are many situations which aren’t as clear-cut. The brand could ship free merchandise, provide a free hotel stay, free backstage passes to meet a celebrity, ‘points’ in the brand’s points programme, or other kinds of “material benefits” that, in the FTC’s view, should be disclosed to the consumer.

Which party is liable—the brand or the influencer—if the ad does not fully disclose information about a promoted product?

All participants in the chain could be subject to the FTC’s wrath—the advertiser, the influencer, an ad agency that connected them, and anyone else in on the situation. All participants are responsible for disclosing the material connection to consumers, otherwise they could be charged with violating the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive advertising practices.

Recently, the FTC brought proceedings against Lord & Taylor, for working with many different influencers to advertise and sell a particular dress, but the influencers failed to disclose the fact that they received free merchandise or other benefits from Lord & Taylor for their social media posts about the dress.

There seems an argument for the ‘influencer’—must they specify where they write ‘promo’ or ‘ad’?

The FTC has touched on this and they just want the disclosure of the material connection to be seen by the reader/viewer. Creative disclosures are permitted as long as it gets the point across, but the most common these days is merely ‘#ad’ or ‘#sponsored’. In a tweet, it doesn’t matter where the phrase is placed because it’s so short. If it’s in the same text, font size, colours, then that is deemed as an effective notification that the following message is sponsored or part of a promotion.

Going forward, how aware do social influencers need to be of disclaimers about sponsored posts?

Very much so, but fortunately, the social media industry, including influencers, are quickly becoming much more comfortable with these disclosures of materials connections with brand advertisers. It can be difficult sometimes, given limited character space, but the FTC’s position is that if disclosures are necessary, but insufficient real estate exists to make the disclosure, then don’t put up the post to begin with because it would be, in essence, false advertising.

The latest interviews from IPPro The Internet
The latest features from IPPro The Internet
The US Supreme Court’s ruling in Star Athletica v Varsity Brands provides a path to copyrightability for pictorial or graphical elements of clothing designs and useful articles. Laura Ganoza and Julie McGinnis of Foley & Lardner explain
As Brexit negotiations begin, it is still unclear where trademarks fit in. But, with two years to get a good deal, the UK government needs to consider all aspects
Join Our Newsletter

Sign up today and never
miss the latest news or an issue again

Subscribe now
Rights holders that want to protect their valuable intellectual property have to be willing to change
Alternative dispute resolution mechanisms are not being used to their full potential, according to IPzen’s Julia Cytrynbaum
India's copyright societies are subject to interim measures that boost transparency. DPS Parmar and Aniruddh Singh of LexOrbis report
Courts are wrestling with the legal definition of users of social networks. Nathalie Dreyfus examines how they have done so far
The BRICS IP Forum and the IP Summit allowed intellectual property professionals to reflect on a topsy-turvy 2016, and hope for a simpler 2017
Experts discuss what brands can do to protect their trademarks online during the Cyber Monday sales, with fakes widely available
Country profiles
The latest country profiles from IPPro The Internet
While Indian fair use is not explicit, provisions exist for the fair dealing of copyright. Rohit Singh and Tina Canneth of Abu-Ghazeleh Intellectual Property delve deeper
An interpretation of the current events exception in Radosavljević is creative, say BDK Advokati's Bogdan Ivanišević and Marko Popović
IPPro Patents

Visit our sister site
for all the latest IP patents news and analysis
Yu-Li Tsai of Deep & Far examines how damages are calculated in patent infringement litigation
A recent amendment will make costly annulments a thing of the past. Gilberto Sanchez of SPECyF explains
New legislation in Turkey promises a swathe of trademark changes. Dr Cahit Suluk of Cahit Suluk Intellectual Property Law Firm explains
A trademark decision clarified ‘against the public order’ as an absolute ground for refusal. Sár and Partners – Danubia Patent & Law Office reports
Bogdan Ivanišević and Marko Popović of BDK Advokati review the recent squabble about copyright protection for ‘routinely created photos’
Alston & Bird recently expanded with a new office focusing on counselling Chinese companies on US intellectual property law. Yitai Hu explains what patent owners face when working across borders