On August 8, 2011, Anne Purcell, the Associate General Counsel for the NLRB released a memo entitled “Report of the Acting General Counsel Concerning Social Media Cases.” The report details recent case developments arising in the context of social media. These recent cases grappled with emerging issues concerning the protected and/or concerted nature of employees Facebook and Twitter postings, the coercive impact of a union’s Facebook and YouTube postings, and the lawfulness of employers’ social media policies and rules.
The NLRB has a mandate to protect employees rights to organize and discuss working conditions without fear of reprisals from employers. The report began by analyzing a case of first impression: whether an Employer unlawfully discharged five employees who had posted comments on Facebook relating to allegations of poor job performance previously expressed by one of their coworkers.
The discussion was conducted through Facebook by coworkers about job performance and staffing level issues. The NLRB found the Facebook discussion was a “textbook” example of protected activity, even though it transpired on a social network platform.
The take away for Employers is that most, if not all, job related social media discussions are protected. Employers must think twice before: (1) dismissing employees for discussing workplace “responsibilities and performance” on the Internet; (2) disciplining employees for “liking” a Facebook comment that is critical of the workplace or employer; and (3) disciplining employees when offline workplace complaints and conversations migrate online via one or more social media posts.
The updated FTC Guides contain two notable areas of concern for marketers. First, the Guides removed the safe harbor for advertisements featuring a consumer’s experience with a product or service, the so-called “results not typical” disclosure. Second, the FTC Guides underscored the longstanding principle of disclosing “material connections” between advertisers and the consumers, experts, organizations, and celebrities providing reviews and endorsements of products and services.
Even with the illustrations provided within the FTC Guides themselves, it is still confusing for advertisers, marketers, bloggers and social media users to know how to comply with the guidelines. The purpose of this article is to provided simple, concrete standards to determine (1) when to make certain disclosures and (2) the type of disclosures required by the situation. I have grouped the disclosures into seven categories: Personal Opinion, Free Samples & Free Gifts, Promotional Relationship, Employment Relationship, Affiliate Relationship, Healthcare Disclosures, and Financial Guidelines & Disclosures. The key requirement to keep in mind is the obligation to disclose any relationship that may have influenced you.
1. Personal Opinion
If you write a review or blog post and your post contains only your own opinions, you haven’t received any compensation for the review or post, and you otherwise have no material connection to the topic of your post, you have nothing to disclose.
2. Free Sample/Free Gift
If you have been given a free copy, sample, or gift of a product or service and you write a review or blog post, you must disclose the facts and circumstances of how you received the item or service, even if you have not been paid to review or post on that topic. You do not run afoul of the disclosure rules if you receive payment unrelated your content. This disclosure is useful to keep in mind when your content relates to product previews, reviews of samples, services, gifts, books, software, music, movies, etc.
3. Promotional Relationships
If you write a review or blog post and your post is based upon an advertising relationship, and you have received compensation (cash, free services, product samples for personal use or a gift) for the review or post, you must disclose the nature of the relationship, whether you received anything of value, and information about relationships with advertisers or endorsers that would have a material impact about how a prospective consumer would view the message. This disclosure is useful to keep in mind when your content relates to paid posts, sponsored messages, tweets, fan page postings, etc.
4. Employment Relationships
If you write a review or blog post and your post is based upon an employment relationship, e.g. you are an employee or shareholder of a related company, you have a “material business relationship” to disclose, even if you are not being directly compensated for the message. You may post on behalf of a business or brand. In fact, it may even be part of your job description. Again, be mindful of the requirement to disclose any “connections” that may have influenced you, including both direct and indirect relationships.
5. Affiliate Relationships
If you write a review or blog post and your post is based upon an affiliate relationship, e.g., you have included affiliate links on your page, you must disclose the fact that the relationship exists and that you will be paid for referrals from your page.
6. Healthcare Disclosures
If you write a review or blog post and your content is based upon a connection to a pharmaceutical or healthcare product or program, you need to include relevant healthcare-related disclosures or information safety warnings, side effects, or official links with information.
7. Financial Guidelines & Disclosures
If you write a review or blog post and you work for a financial services company, you may be making investor-relations communications and your communications are subject to regulation by the NASD, SEC, FINRA and potentially state and federal regulatory agencies. The FINRA Guidance on Blogs & Social Networking Sites” can be found here. Record Retention: ensure that you can retain records of those communications. Suitability: a particular communication a “recommendation” for purposes of NASD Rule 2310 and is it suitable for potential recipients. Public Appearances: determine whether your post part of an “interactive online forum” and whether supervision is required. Third-Party Posts: If your firm created or “sponsors” and online forum, be aware that, under certain circumstances, a customer’s or other third party’s content on a social media site may become attributable to the firm. Whether third-party content is attributable to a firm depends on whether the firm has (1) involved itself in the preparation of the content or (2) explicitly or implicitly endorsed or approved the content.
Clearly, legal and regulatory compliance for social media remains a minefield. Although this article is intended to give you a working knowledge of the types of risks created by, and disclosures required for, the use of Social Media, it is NOT LEGAL ADVICE. Each situation is unique and you should consult with qualified legal counsel regarding your specific circumstances.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
David M. Adler, Esq. is an attorney, author, educator, entrepreneur and partner at the boutique intellectual property, entertainment & media law firm LEAVENS, STRAND, GLOVER & ADLER, LLC based in Chicago, Illinois. My responsibilities include providing advice to business units and executives on copyright, trademark, ecommerce, software/IT, media & entertainment and issues associated with creating and commercializing innovations and creative content, drafting and negotiating contracts and licenses, advising on securities laws and corporate governance and managing outside counsel. Learn more about me here: www.ecommerceattorney.com and here: Leavens Strand Glover & Adler, LLC.
The United States is one the few countries in the developed world that lacks a comprehensive law protecting consumer privacy. Geolocation, personalized ads, group-buying deals, tracking cookies and other technologies have a wide range of privacy implications. Incidents like the phone-hacking scandal in the U.K. underscore the growing concern among both the general public and Congress here in the U.S.
Unlike citizens in Europe, Asia and Latin America, U.S. laws addressing rights and obligations surrounding sensitive-information tend to be sector-specific and inconsistent (HIPPA, COPPA, etc.). Notably, the FTC, the federal agency tasked with safeguarding consumers, has taken a largely laissez-faire approach. The result of Guidelines and enforcement actions is essentially a policy of “do as you like, just don’t lie about it.”
While congressional attention has been focused on updating the regulatory regime, the current legislation reflects the piecemeal approach of the past. Here is a break-down of the Five leading government privacy initiatives. Bills starting with H.R. are from the US House, and bills starting with S. are from the US Senate. The numbers are from the 112th Congress: 2011-2012.
H.R. 654: Do Not Track Me Online Act, sponsored by Rep. Jackie Speier [D-CA12] is to direct the Federal Trade Commission to prescribe regulations regarding the collection and use of information obtained by tracking the Internet activity of an individual, introduced Feb 11, 2011. Status: This bill is in the first step in the legislative process.
S. 913: Do-Not-Track Online Act of 2011, sponsored by Sen. John Rockefeller [D-WV] is a bill to require the Federal Trade Commission to prescribe regulations regarding the collection and use of personal information obtained by tracking the online activity of an individual, introduced May 9, 2011. Status: This bill is in the first step in the legislative process.
H.R. 1895: Do Not Track Kids Act of 2011, sponsored by Representatives Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts Democrat, and Joe Barton, Texas Republican, is aimed specifically at internet marketing to minors, introduced May 13, 2011. Status: This bill is in the first step in the legislative process.
S. 413: Cybersecurity and Internet Freedom Act of 2011, associated with the phrase the “internet kill switch” was, sponsored by Sen. Joseph Lieberman [I-CT], introduced Feb 17, 2011. Status: This bill is in the first step in the legislative process.
S. 799: Commercial Privacy Bill of Rights Act of 2011, sponsored by Sen. John Kerry [D-MA] Introduced Apr 12, 2011. Status: This bill is in the first step in the legislative process
Complete text of the various bills is available at GovTrack.us.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
David M. Adler, Esq. is an attorney, author, educator, entrepreneur and partner at the boutique intellectual property, entertainment & media law firm LEAVENS, STRAND, GLOVER & ADLER, LLC based in Chicago, Illinois. My responsibilities include providing advice to business units and executives on copyright, trademark, ecommerce, software/IT, media & entertainment and issues associated with creating and commercializing innovations and creative content, drafting and negotiating contracts and licenses, advising on securities laws and corporate governance and managing outside counsel. Learn more about me here: http://www.ecommerceattorney.com and here: hLeavens Strand Glover & Adler, LLC
BITS, the technology policy division of US bank-backed The Financial Services Roundtable, has released “Social Media Risks and Mitigation,” a framework for financial institutions adopting social media and a guide to managing related security risks.
Social media issues span legal, compliance, marketing, communications, IT and human resources departments. “Financial services customers are using social media and demanding that institutions have a secure and prudent presence there,” said Andrew Kennedy, BITS’ social media lead. The bits paper provides an enterprise-wide view of policies, practices, communications and risk management strategies.
David M. Adler, Esq. is an attorney, author, educator, entrepreneur and partner at the boutique intellectual property, entertainment & media law firm LEAVENS, STRAND, GLOVER & ADLER, LLC based in Chicago, Illinois. My responsibilities include providing advice to business units and executives on copyright, trademark, ecommerce, software/IT, media & entertainment and issues associated with creating and commercializing innovations and creative content, drafting and negotiating contracts and licenses, advising on securities laws and corporate governance and managing outside counsel. Learn more about me here: www.ecommerceattorney.com
Ping® by AdlerLaw A Legal Blog 