Topics to be addressed include best practices for direct, digital and mobile marketing including advising on permission-based marketing, emerging technologies, the use of various social media platforms, as well as data security and privacy issues related to electronic and mobile commerce.
New FTC guidelines in the areas of advertising any marketing, as well as consumer privacy and security, have raised awareness of these issues for brands, marketing firms and service providers.
David M. Adler, Esq. is an attorney, author, educator, entrepreneur and nationally-recognized speaker in the fields of intellectual property, media & entertainment and technology law with a multidisciplinary practice focused on counseling businesses across the interrelated areas of Intellectual Property Law, Media & Entertainment, Information Technology and Corporate Law. David provides legal counsel on trademark and copyright clearance, registration and enforcement, digital and new media licensing, production, finance, regulations, Social Media, litigation and corporate-commercial transactions.
David has an extensive private-practice and in-house background counseling clients on marketing, advertising and content deals, lead-generation agreements, referral agreements, advertising-supported revenue deals, product placement, affiliate marketing/group-couponing platforms, CAN-SPAM compliance, digital rights management for video, music, and games. We work with many of the leading studios, labels, social networking sites, and online music companies. He also specializes in advising artistic talent and creative professionals in the arts, entertainment, media and sports industries.
As our lives have become more digitally enmeshed with content, immersive entertainment and devices, the economic bargain that makes it possible has gone largely unnoticed. Simply put, the collection, analysis and sharing of personal data is driving the digital economy. Mobile applications (Apps), digital content and entertainment – from TV shows to games – are available for “free” but subsidized by income from online ads that are customized using data about customers. Vendors, advertisers and platforms compete for “eyeballs” based, in part, on the quality of the information they possess about users to whom the ads are targeted.
Across this interconnected landscape of users, content providers and devices, the issue of online privacy has become a major talking point for app developers, marketers, consumers and legislators. Recently, a wide range of stakeholders, from large institutions to smaller developers, have been accused of mishandling personal data. As the volume of public debate has increased, legislators have introduced a raft privacy initiatives. The Obama administration has called for a Privacy Bill of Rights, an industry consortium of leading web sites and search engines has proposed its own privacy best practices and the Electronic Frontier Foundation has published a consumer-oriented Mobile User Privacy Bill of Rights.
Part 1 of this article looks at several recent and high-profile revelations about how personal information is collected and used, often without the user’s knowledge and consent. Part 2 discusses the legal risks faced by vendors that don’t take adequate precautions to protect consumer privacy and Part 3 concludes with strategies and tactics that help leverage the power of personalization while avoiding the pitfalls of privacy and data security.
1. The current state of information gathering
The scope of personal information gathered is unprecedented and largely unknown. For years, “free” web-based content has been available because of the implicit compromise between content providers and content consumers. Advances in technology have made it easier to track a user’s web browsing habits, mobile browsing habits, and even real-time geospatial location (check in apps and GPS). In the last few months, we have learned that some apps not only gather this mostly non-personally-identifiable data, but also upload a user’s address book contacts and even photos.
On Wednesday Feb. 2012, software Developer Arun Thampi “outed” Path, the purveyor of a self-titled journaling app, for sending users’ address book contents to the company. Path lets users share what they’re doing with a select group of friends and gives users the option to find friends on the app through contacts or other social networks. Thampi disclosed the clandestine data transfer in a blog post after discovering that his phone’s entire address book, including full names and e-mail addresses, was being sent to Path without his explicit consent. According to Path, this data was necessary to in order to quickly notify users when people they know join Path.
Not too long ago, Google earned itself a similar PR (and legal) black eye when it launched its social network, Google Buzz, in 2010 through its Gmail web-based email product. At launch, users were not informed that the identity of individuals they emailed most frequently would be made public by default. Google Buzz automatically disclosed the email addresses of a user’s contacts by default. Google settled with the FTC over allegations that Google used deceptive practices and violated its own privacy policies.
On Feb 17 2012, WSJ reported that Google Inc. and other advertising companies have been bypassing the privacy settings of millions of people using Apple Inc.’s Web browser on their iPhones and computers—tracking the Web-browsing habits of people who intended for that kind of monitoring to be blocked. The companies used special computer code that tricks Apple’s Safari Web-browsing software into letting them monitor many users. Safari, the most widely used browser on mobile devices, is designed to block such tracking by default.
A major topic for discussion just this week is the “Target Snafu.” As originally reported in the New York Times, Target used customer data and predictive analytics to determine that one of their customers was pregnant, and even her specific trimester. The girl’s father learned of the pregnancy when the retailer emailed her promotional material and coupons.
It used to take days or even weeks to gather, synthesize and extrapolate data about a customer’s buying habits and receptiveness to particular products or services. Now it takes milliseconds. A targeted ad can be sourced and served in the time it takes to hit “refresh” on a web browser. Companies are using massive amounts of data to predict what their customers are going to want next. More importantly, gathering that data is getting easier, cheaper and more ubiquitous as the source of that data moves from the desktop to mobile devices.
So where is the middle ground between privacy and targeted advertising? Is it spying simply because the user doesn’t know what data is being collected even though the user accepted a broad and ambiguous Terms of Use agreement? Is knowingly contributing data without boundaries sufficiently transparent?
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
The use of social media for marketing and advertising purposes is one of the fastest growing areas for business and marketers. The advent of social media sites like Facebook provides the opportunity for authentic interaction and engagement with customers. Therefore, it is no surprise that it is being used as a marketing tool by companies large and small to help them achieve their strategic goals. But with every technological development and opportunity, new legal and business risks present themselves. Understanding and minimizing these risks will help you maximize the opportunities. A best practices approach to social media marketing involves having the company’s philosophy, methodology, and guidelines captured in a comprehensive written policy that is clearly and regularly communicated to the employees, and regularly updated to keep abreast of new developments, opportunities and evolving legal guidance. Attendees will learn how to identify the legal issues and develop policies and procedures to keep informed about the current technology, marketing strategies and regulatory compliance.
Everyone at AF Expo shares a belief that the Facebook experience represents a paradigm shift in the way that marketing professionals identify, engage and convert customers. In the past, marketers had to conduct research to locate customs and to determine their wants and needs. Once these were identified, you needed to convince your customers to value your brand, understand your product/service and ultimately purchase what you were selling.
Facebook changes all of these assumptions. It offers an interactive platform where customs are actively engaged in seeking out the brands they are interested in – whether individually or through trusted networks, tell brand owned what they do and do not like about their brand and tell marketers whether they are open to receiving more information. Interestingly, the platform allows marketers to continue the conversation even when the customer has nominally disengaged (through trusted networks).
Like everything else, with great power comes great risks. Facebook marketing that is thoughtful, respectful and legally compliant is extremely effective. [give examples] However, marketing efforts that fail to understand and account for the requirements to maintain legal compliance can be a fixated.
In the beginning one could poke, like and comment. But what happens when you can purchase? Facebook is rapidly becoming a platform to identify, locate, contact and transact business with consumers of goods and services, both physical and virtual, using currency that is both physical and virtual.
My presentation will identify and explain the risks for Facebook marketers, grouped into three risk categories, “The Three Cs” of Facebook marketing:
WordCluster Analytics Provide Rapid Visualization of Hot Topics
Kudos to Barry Ritholz and his Blog The Big Picture for turning us all on to a phenomenal new social media metrics tool: Tweet Topic Explorer. This Tool retrieves the most commonly used words in recent (no word on time period covered by “recent”) “tweets” for a specific user and displays these visually using bubble clusters. The area of the circle for a word is proportional to that word’s frequency. Words most often used together are grouped by color.
For example, using my Twitter handle, @adlerlaw, produces a cloud that shows the words “film,” “media,” “legal,” “social” and “Chicago” are among my most frequently used words. Looking at groupings, “Film” is used most commonly with words like “tax” and “indie.” The words “Law” and “Legal” appear most frequently with “social,” “media” “brand,” and “trademark.”
The potential for brand managers and social media marketing professionals is obvious. First, a brand manager can quickly and easily analyze what key words are being used and how they are being used for any given twitter handle. Note that if your handle is identical to a brand name, this is critical visual evidence of the words being used in connection with your brand! Second, if you area marketing professional, you can analyze individual handles to get feedback on words being used by social media influencers and other specific followers.
The value should be obvious by now. This tool creates an amazing feedback mechanism. The brand owner/marketing professional can easily see if the message they are trying to communicate is really coming through as well as they intend. For example, check out the word cloud for “Coca-Cola.” I was amazed to see that the most frequent word is “^GD.” I don’t know about you, but that’s not communicating anything about the brand. Whereas positive attribute words like “sharing” and “delicious” are much less prominent.
Also, the potential to uncover negative words will be displayed prominently. This gives brand managers insight into the areas, issues and users that they need to target.
I’m not saying its going to be easy. In order to get the most out of this tool, one is going to have to spend time analyzing users one by one. However, this is one of the best tools I’ve seen that breaks tweets down into a clear, visual, actionable matrix.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
David M. Adler, Esq. is an attorney, author, educator, entrepreneur and founder of a boutique intellectual property law firm based in Chicago, Illinois. With over fourteen years of legal experience, Mr. Adler created the firm with a specific mission in mind: to provide businesses with a competitive advantage by enabling them to leverage their intangible assets and creative content in a way that drives innovation and increases the overall value of the business. Learn more about me HERE.
David M. Adler, Esq. Safeguarding Ideas, Relationships & Talent®
Confused by what is and is not Green? You’re not alone.
Part 1 of 5
The last few years have seen a dramatic increase in consumer awareness and concern for environmentally-conscious or “green” consumerism. Coincidentally, as consumers join the movement to be more eco-friendly, businesses have likewise embraced both being green and being perceived as green in their marketing practices. The rapid proliferation of “green” brands begs the question “How do consumers and institutional buyers know if something is “green” or “eco-friendly”?”
To address such concerns, companies and industries have launched “ecolabels” and “eco-certification” schemes to add credibility to green claims, guide eco-friendly purchasing, and improve environmental performance standards. Demand for products with ecolabels is growing, though confusion about which companies are truly environmentally responsible persists.
Since environmental claims made in advertisements are often intangible, businesses need to make them resonate to consumers beyond just feeling good about what they are buying. Consumers and businesses can benefit from eco-labels by: (1) understanding how certification marks, labels and logos can be used to signal green credentials, (2) using and maintaining proper best practices and guidelines to which companies must adhere in order to meet a certified standard, (3) understanding which companies have succeeded in branding and why, (4) understanding how to avoid accusations of “greenwashing”, or exaggerated claims in their marketing, and (5) keeping informed about the changes in the legal and regulatory environment, such as the FTC‘s Green Guides for marketers.
This five-part series on “green” branding will discuss how to identify these issues, provide guidance on proper use of “green” certification marks, a/k/a “eco-labels,” develop policies and procedures to avoid misleading or unproven environmental claims and keep informed about the current trends, marketing strategies and regulatory regimes.
Certification marks, and their role in signaling green credentials
A certification mark “certifies” the nature or origin of the goods or services to which it has been applied. This includes, for example, region or location or origin, materials of construction, method or mode of manufacture or provision, quality assurance, accuracy of the goods or services or any definable characteristic of the goods or services. It can also certify manufacture or provision of services by members of a union or other organization to certain standards.
For example, the Fair Trade Certified™ label applied to food products ensures that farmers and farm workers in developing nations receive a fair price for their product, have direct trade relations with buyers and access to credit, and encourage sustainable farming methods, without the use of a dozen of the most harmful pesticides, and forced child labor. The seal is viewed as a meaningful and clear signal that the producer supports the concepts of social responsibility, pest management and sustainable agriculture.
Under U.S. federal trademark law, a certification mark has a specific definition and certain characteristics. The term “certification mark” means any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof that is used by a person other than its owner to certify origin, material, manufacture, quality, accuracy, or other characteristics of goods or services.
There are generally three types of certification marks. First, there are geographic certification marks that signal that goods or services originate in a specific region (e.g., ROQUEFORT for cheese). Second, there are quality certification marks that indicate goods or services meet certain standards in relation to quality, materials, or mode of manufacture (e.g., approval by Underwriters Laboratories). Third, there are labor certification marks that certify (i) services performed or labor used in the manufacture of a product were provided by a member of a union or other organization, or (ii) the service provider meets certain standards.
Certification marks possess two distinct characteristics that set them apart from trademarks or service marks. First, unlike a trademark, a certification mark is used by someone other than the owner. The mark is generally applied by other persons to their goods or services, with authorization from the owner of the mark. Second, while the exclusive purpose of a trademark is to indicate commercial source or distinguish the goods or services of one person from another, a certification mark has no such purpose.
A certification mark is not used in the trademark sense of “used.” Rather, it may be used only by persons other than the owner of the mark. That is, the owner of a certification mark does not apply the mark to his or her goods or services and, in fact, usually does not attach or apply the mark at all. The owner of a certification mark does not produce the goods or perform the services in connection with which the mark is used, and thus does not control their nature and quality. Rather, “control” consists of ensure that users of the mark meet the standards established by the certifier. The purpose of a certification mark is to inform purchasers that the goods or services of a person possess certain characteristics or meet certain qualifications or standards established by another person.
Proper us of “eco-friendly” certification marks can help businesses and marketers to add credibility to “green” marketing claims. As noted above, since the user of a certification mark is not the owner, the organization doing the certifying cannot itself engage in the production or marketing of the goods or services. Furthermore, the organization must be competent to certify that the requirements have been met. This is achieved by confirming adherence to the rules and regulations, providing methods of testing and quality control, and employing appointed individuals or bodies to periodically ensure conformance by a user.
Ping® by AdlerLaw A Legal Blog 