12th Annual Stanford E-commerce Best Practices Conference presentation (Lisa Borodkin, Attorney at Law and Bennett Kelly, Internet Law Center)
1 of 40
Download to read offline
More Related Content
How To Act As A Business In A World In Which User Feedback And Reviews Are Critical To Your Reputation And Business
1. How To Act As A Business In
A World In Which User
Feedback And Reviews Are
Critical To Your Reputation
And Business
Lisa
Borodkin,
A.orney
at
Law
Bennet
Kelley,
Internet
Law
Center
3. 64%
Consumers
who
search
for
reviews
before
making
purchase
5-足9%
Revenue
Increase
for
addiBonal
Yelp
Star
89%
Consumers
who
鍖nd
online
reviews
to
be
trustworthy
13,
34,
53%
Likelihood
of
prime
Bme
sell
out
for
3,
3.5
and
4-足star
restaurants
3
4. ≒ Unfair
Business
Prac.ces
Court
rejected
claim
that
Yelp
pracBces
were
extorBon
since
that
requires
that
liBgant
have
a
pre-足exisBng
right
to
be
free
from
the
threatened
harm,
or
that
the
defendant
had
no
right
to
seek
payment
for
the
service
o鍖ered.
Yelps
acBons
were
not
a
wrongful
use
of
economic
fear.
Boris
Y.
Levi.,
et
al.
v.
Yelp
Inc.,
No.
11-足17676,
2014
U.S.
App.
LEXIS
17079
(9th
Cir.
Sept.
2,
2014)
≒ Sec.on
230
Immunity
Challenge
Fact
that
Yelp
created
star
raBng
based
on
reviews,
did
not
transform
an
interacBve
computer
service
into
a
developer
of
the
underlying
misinformaBon
for
purposes
of
SecBon
230
of
the
CDA.
Kimzey
v.
Yelp
Inc.,
2014
WL
1805551
(W.D.
Wash.
May
7,
2014).
≒ False
Adver.sing
Cal.
Court
of
Appeal
judge
reversed
a
SLAPP
dismissal
of
a
False
AdverBsing
acBon
based
on
Yelps
claims
that
each
review
passed
through
a
鍖lter
that
gave
consumers
the
most
trusted
reviews.
Demetriades
v
Yelp!,
2014
WL
3661491
(Cal.
App.
Ct.
July
24,
2014).
≒ FTC
Inves.ga.on
Closed
without
comment.
FIVE-STAR LITIGATION*
4
6. COPYRIGHT AS A SHIELD
≒ Medical
Jus.ce
Created
paBent
contracts
assigning
IP
in
consumer
reviews
to
doctor.
Abandoned
in
2011.
≒ New
York
v.
Network
Associates,
758
N.Y.S.2d
466
(N.Y.
Sup.
Ct.
2003)
violated
consumer
protecBon
laws.
≒ US
Dept
of
Health
and
Human
Services
prohibited
doctor
from
condiBoning
privacy
compliance
with
consent
to
review
prohibiBon.
≒ Small
Jus.ce
Acquired
copyright
in
defamatory
post
on
RipO鍖Report.com
≒ Small
JusQce
LLC
v.
Xcentric
Ventures,
LLC,
No.
13-足CV-足11701,
2015
WL
1431071
(D.
Mass.
Mar.
27,
2015),
appeal
pending.
≒ Click
wrap
agreement
su鍖cient
to
transfer
exclusive
copyright.
By
posBng
this
report/rebu.al,
I
a.est
this
report
is
valid.
I
am
giving
Rip-足O鍖
Report
irrevocable
rights
to
post
it
on
the
website.
I
acknowledge
that
once
I
post
my
report,
it
will
not
be
removed,
even
at
my
request.
6
7. CONSUMER GAG AGREEMENTS
Kleargear.coms
Self-足in鍖icted
Wound
Improper
a.empt
to
enforce
non-足
disparagement
clause
(established
ajer
transacBon
at
issue)
becomes
cause
c辿l竪bre,
resulBng
in
judgment
of
$354K
for
consumer.
Palmer
v.
Kleargear.com,
No.
13-足cv-足00175
(D.
Utah
May
5,
2014).
Kleargear
Fallout
≒ California
Passes
AnE-足Kleargear
Law
(Civil
Code
SecEon
1670.8(a)(1)):
A
contract
for
the
sale
or
lease
of
consumer
goods
or
services
may
not
include
a
provision
waiving
the
consumers
right
to
make
any
statement
regarding
the
seller
or
lessor
or
its
employees
or
agents,
or
concerning
the
goods
or
services.
≒ Kleargear
has
not
scared
o鍖
others,
penalty
clauses
sBll
in
use
≒ Arizona,
New
York
Courts
Indicate
Gag
Agreements
May
Be
Enforceable
≒ FreeLife
Int'l,
Inc.
v.
Am.
Educ.
Music
PublicaQons
Inc.,
No.
CV07-足2210-足PHXDGC,
2009
WL
3241795
(D.
Ariz.
Oct.
1,
2009)(gag
agreement
not
procedurally
or
substanBvely
unconscionably
under
AZ
law).
≒ Gallard
v
Johnston,
No.
1:2014cv04411
1290775
(SDNY
March
19,
2015)
(refusing
to
dismiss
claim
under
gag
agreement).
7
8. RESPONDING TO
REVIEWS
≒ Rule
#1:
Be
Aware
of
Your
Reviews
≒ Own
Your
NegaBve
Reviews
≒ Wisdom
of
the
Masses
≒ Increase
Overall
Reviews
≒ IniBate
contact
prior
to
posBng
reviews
(Anonymous
VenBng)
≒ Direct
Users
to
Review
Sites
You
Approve
≒ Unfair
Review
ConsideraBons
≒ Does
it
violate
site
terms?
≒ Is
it
defamatory?
≒ Is
it
material
(Streisand
E鍖ect)?
≒ Can
more
content/SEO
bury
it?
8
9. POLICING SITE REVIEWS
≒ Community
veri鍖caBon,
鍖agging,
reporBng
≒ User
authenBcaBon
(Angies
List)
≒ User
stack
up-足voBng
for
quality
≒ RaBng
consumers
(Uber,
EBay)
≒ Tolerance
for
online
culture
(Amazon
fake
reviews)
9
10. APPENDIX 1: REFERENCE
≒ 5
FascinaBng
Yelp
Facts,
Local
Vox
(Jan.
22,
2014).
≒ Crowd-足sourced
online
reviews
help
鍖ll
restaurant
seats,
study
鍖nds,
UC
Berkley
News
Center
(Sep.
4,
2012).
≒ Harvard
Study:
Yelp
Drives
Demand
for
Independent
Restaurants,
Yelp
O鍖cial
Blog
(Oct.
5,
2011).
≒ David
S.
Ardia,
Free
Speech
Savior
or
Shield
for
Scoundrels:
An
Empirical
Study
of
Intermediary
Immunity
under
SecBon
230
of
the
CommunicaBons
Decency
Act,
43
Loy.
L.A.
L.
Rev.
373
(2010).
≒ Michael
Anderson
and
Jeremy
Magruder,
Learning
from
the
Crowd:
Regression
DisconBnuity
EsBmates
of
the
E鍖ects
of
an
Online
Review
Database,
The
Economic
Journal
(Oct.
5,
2011).
≒ Cyrus
Farivar,
Emba.led
retailer
KlearGear
鍖ghts
back
against
online
review
defeat,
Ars
Technica
(May
20,
2014).
≒ Eric
Goldman,
Consumer
Reviews
of
Doctors
and
Copyright
Law,
University
of
Houston
Law
Center,
InsBtute
for
Intellectual
Property
&
InformaBon
Law
(IPIL)
Advisory
Board
Dinner,
Houston
(Jan.
2011).
≒ Caroline
Myer,
The
Perils
of
PosBng
Scathing
Reviews
on
Yelp
and
Angie's
List,
Forbes
(Jan
7.
2013).
≒ Lucille
M.
Ponte,
ProtecBng
Brand
Image
or
Gaming
the
System?
Consumer
Gag
Contracts
in
an
Age
of
Crowdsourced
RaBngs
and
Reviews,
William
&
Mary
Business
Law
Review
(2015).
10
11. APPENDIX 2: LISA BORODKIN
11
Principal
and
Founder
of
Lisa
Borodkin,
A.orney
at
Law
Entertainment
and
IP
PracBce
in
Los
Angeles
RepresentaBve
cases:
Metallica
v.
Napster;
Williams
v.
Bridgeport
Music;
SEO
and
defamaBon
liBgaBon
Recurring
guest,
THIS
WEEK
IN
LAW
on
TWiT.TV
Op-足Ed
columnist,
San
Francisco
Chronicle,
The
Guardian
則р Harvard
University,
A.B.
1990
則р Columbia
University
School
of
Law,
J.D.
1995
則р Law
Clerk,
Hon.
Diane
P.
Wood,
7th
Circuit
Court
of
Appeals
(1996-足97)
則р Law
Clerk,
I.
Leo
Glasser,
U.S.
District
Court,
E.D.N.Y.
(1995-足96)
Website:
lisaborodkin.com
Twi.er:
@lisaborodkin
12. APPENDIX 3: BENNET KELLEY
Founder
of
the
INTERNET
LAW
CENTER
in
Santa
Monica
Host
of
CYBER
LAW
AND
BUSINESS
REPORT
Broadcast
through
Webmaster
Radio
and
Podcast
Channels
Nominated
for
LA
Press
Club
Award
for
Best
Public
A鍖airs
Talk
Radio
Show
in
2014
Honors:
則р Named
One
of
Most
In鍖uenBal
Lawyers
in
Digital
Media
and
E-足Commerce
by
Los
Angeles
Business
Journal
(2014)
則р Past
Co-足Chair
of
the
California
Bar
Cyberspace
Commi.ee
則р Selected
By
US
Dept
of
Commerce
to
Present
on
U.S.
E-足Commerce
Law
as
part
of
2012
U.S.-足China
Legal
Exchange
Website:
InternetlLawCenter.net
Blog:
ILCCyberReport.wordpress.com
Tw:
@InternetLawCent
12
13. 際際滷s on Reward Programs
Stanford 6-足8-足15
Edward
B.
Chansky
Shareholder
Greenberg
Traurig,
LLP
14. Three Types of Programs
≒ TradiBonal
Rewards
≒ Gij
Cards
≒ Groupon-足Style
Discounts
15. ≒ TradiBonal
Rewards
≒ Credit
Card
and
Airlines
as
the
model
≒ Reserve
the
Right
to
Terminate/Modify
≒ How
to
give
noBce
and
reserve
right
to
change
a
contract
while
maintaining
a
binding
contract.
GIVE
NOTICE!
16. ≒ Gij
Cards
≒ Front
end
restricBons
on
expiraBon
dates
and
dormancy
fees.
≒ Back
end
escheat
compliance
≒ With
address
of
record
for
holder
≒ Without
address
of
record
for
holder
≒ See
Texas
v.
New
Jersey,
379
U.S.
674
(1965)
≒ Single
Purpose
EnBty
to
administer
program
from
a
non-足escheat
state?
Make
sure
it
is
not
a
sham.
≒ 50-足state
chart
of
gij
card
&
escheat
laws:
h.p://www.ncsl.org/research/鍖nancial-足services-足and-足commerce/gij-足cards-足
and-足cerB鍖cates-足statutes-足and-足legis.aspx
17. ≒ Hybrid
Groupon-足Style
Program
≒ Pay
$10
for
the
right
to
obtain
a
$20
extra-足large
pizza
with
double
cheese.
≒ O鍖er
expires
if
not
used
in
30
days.
≒ Whats
lej
ajer
the
30
days?
≒ Nothing?
Full
value?
$10
gij
card?
≒ Who
has
the
escheat
duty?
≒ Groupon?
Pizzeria?
For
how
much?
$20?
(promoBonal
value)
$10?
(gij
card
value)
$5?
(amount
merchant
received)
25. WilmerHale
FTC In a Nutshell
≒ Nations Consumer Protection Agency
≒ Authority over most of economy (except, in general, banks, common
carriers, and nonprofits).
≒ Uses Section 5 of the FTC Act (Statute is in equity)
≒ Deception: A representation or omission regarding a material fact likely to mislead
a reasonable consumer under the circumstances.
≒ Unfairness: An act or practice that causes substantial consumer injury that is not
reasonably avoidable by consumers and not outweighed by benefits to consumers
or competition.
≒ Remedies: Injunctive, restitution, disgorgement, recision. No civil penalties for
Section 5 violations (yet).
25
26. WilmerHale
FTC Data Security Standard
The FTC takes the position (being tested now in litigation) that Section 5
of the FTC Act requires Reasonable Security under the circumstances:
that companies have reasonable controls against reasonably foreseeable
risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of personal information,
taking into account the size of the company and the sensitivity of the
information it holds.
≒ Tort standard
≒ NOT strict liability
≒ What does this mean in practice?
26
27. WilmerHale
1. Written Information Security Program
≒ Have a comprehensive security program that is reasonably designed to:
(1) address security risks related to the development and management of new and existing
products and services for consumers, and
(2) protect the security, integrity, and confidentiality of covered information, whether
collected by respondent or input into, stored on, captured with, or accessed through a computer using
respondents products or services.
≒ Such program, the content and implementation of which must be fully documented in writing,
must contain administrative, technical, and physical safeguards appropriate to respondents
size and complexity, the nature and scope of respondents activities, and the sensitivity of the
covered information, including:
≒ Responsible Employee or Employees for Program:
≒ Designate an employee or employees to coordinate and be accountable for the security program;
27
28. WilmerHale
2. Identify Reasonably Foreseeable Risks
≒ Identify material internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of covered
information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, loss, alteration, destruction, or other
possession or is input into, stored on, captured with, or accessed through a computer using respondents
products or services, and assess of the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks.
≒ Assess Existing Safeguards to Address Identified Risks:
≒ At a minimum, the risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each area of relevant
operation, including, but not limited to,
1. employee training and management, including in secure engineering and defensive programming;
2. product design, development and research;
3. secure software design, development, and testing;
4. review, assessment, and response to third-party security vulnerability reports, and
5. prevention, detection, and response to attacks, intrusions, or systems failures;
28
29. WilmerHale
3. Add Controls for Identified Risks Where Necessary;
then Test and Monitor:
≒ Design and implement reasonable safeguards to control
the risks identified through risk assessment, and regular
testing or monitoring of the effectiveness of the
safeguards key controls, systems, and procedures,
including through reasonable and appropriate software
security testing techniques.
29
30. WilmerHale
4. Manage Service Providers Carefully:
≒ Develop and use of reasonable steps to select and retain
service providers capable of maintaining security practices
consistent with this standard, and require service providers
by contract to implement and maintain appropriate
safeguards.
30
31. WilmerHale
5. Update Security Program As Necessary:
≒ Evaluate and adjust your information security program in
light of the results of your testing and monitoring, any
material changes to your operations or business
arrangements, or any other circumstances that you knows
or have reason to know may have a material impact on the
effectiveness of your information security program.
31
32.
FTCs
Amended
Guides
Concerning
the
Use
of
Endorsements
and
Testimonials
in
Advertising
***
Monday, June 8, 2015
1:45pmPST
Copyright
2015
Francine
D.
Ward.
All
Rights
Reserved.
32
33. Francine Ward is a business and intellectual property attorney, with a focus on copyrights, trademarks,
publishing, entertainment, and social media legal issues. A 1989 graduate of Georgetown University Law
Center, Francine is admitted to practice in New York, California, and the District of Columbia. Additionally, she is
admitted to the Bar of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal for the 2nd and 9th Circuits; as well as the U.S. District
Courts for the Central District of California and the Southern District of New York.
Ward is a member of the ABA-IPL Sections CLE Board, Chair of the ABA-IPL Terms of Use Subcommittee of the
Copyright & Social Media Committee, and Vice Char of the Copyright Interest Group of the IP Section of the
California State Bar. Francine is also a Commissioner on the ABAs Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs.
Find her (http://francineward.com/category/legal-blog/), LinkedIn Profile (http://www.linkedin.com/in/trademarklawyer), Facebook Law Fan
Page (https://www.facebook.com/Francineward), and her Twitter Law Page (https://twitter.com/Francineward).
Copyright 2015 Francine D. Ward
All Rights Reserved.
33
About
Francine
D.
Ward,
Esq.
34. 即 The FTC Guides Concerning Use of Endorsements and
Testimonials in Advertising - originally written in the
1970s; amended 1980; amended October 2009. (16
C.F.R. 則 255).
即 Endorsement -- a claim that consumers are likely to
believe as reflecting the opinion, belief, experience of
someone other than the advertiser
即 FTC definition embraces celebrity, expert, and consumer
testimonials
Endorsements
&
Testimonials
Copyright 2015 Francine D. Ward
All Rights Reserved.
35. 1. Endorsements can be made explicitly or implicitly by words,
demonstrations, signatures, likenesses, or any other identifying
characteristic of the endorser
2. Regardless of the manner of the endorsement, advertiser must
have substantiation for the:
nvalidity of the endorsement
nvalidity of the underlying claim being endorsed.
Substantiation
Copyright 2015 Francine D. Ward
All Rights Reserved.
36. 1. Endorser MUST be real person
2. Clearly & conspicuously disclosed
3. Accurately reflects endorsers belief/experience at all times
4. Endorser must have reasonable basis for claims
5. Claim that endorser uses product must be true at all times
6. Advertisers need not disclose that a celebrity or expert was paid UNLESS
the existence of the relationship is not reasonably expected by the
audience and such discovery might materially affect the weight or
credibility of claim
Key
Endorsement
Requirements
Copyright 2015 Francine D. Ward
All Rights Reserved.
37. 即 Customer Identification. Advertisers use consumer testimonials to gain
customer trust because customers identify with endorsers.
即 No Expertise Required. Testimonials are largely anecdotal and subjective
evidence as to the quality of a product/service.
即 Additional Requirements Needed. Generalizing anecdotal experiences may be
deceptive if the selected customers experience is atypical.
Testimonials
Copyright 2015 Francine D. Ward
All Rights Reserved.
38. 即 Advertiser must have reasonable basis and proof that
造も endorser uses product
造も endorsers claim reflects their claimed experience
造も endorsers claim is typical of what other consumers can reasonably expect
即 Results Not Typical NOT acceptable language
即 As with other forms of endorsement, any atypical relationship between the advertiser
and endorser must be disclosed
即 Advertisers may use actors so long as it is clearly and conspicuously disclosed in the
advertisements that the actors are not actual consumers
Testimonials:
Additional
Requirements
Copyright 2015 Francine D. Ward
All Rights Reserved.
39. 1. Read and understand the Guidelines
2. Endorsements can be made by words or deeds
3. Dont ask your employees to advertise for you
4. Dont hide disclosures
5. Compensation is not just money
6. Endorsements must reflect the truthful experience of the
endorser
7. Dont make claims that require proof you dont have
8. Clearly disclose any material connection between the endorser
and advertiser
Take
Aways
Copyright 2015 Francine D. Ward
All Rights Reserved.
40. Francine
D.
Ward,
Esq.
Business & Intellectual Property Attorney
Trademarks | Copyrights | Book Contracts | Social Media Law
Helping small business entrepreneurs protect whats theirstheir valuable products, content, brand,
and business structure
www.fwardattorney.com
www.twitter.com/francineward
www.facebook.com/francineward
info@fwarda.orney.com
40
THANK
YOU!
Copyright
2015
Francine
D.
Ward.
All
Rights
Reserved.