Post: #1

Anyone who has received or is receiving free products from anyone who advertises those products need to be aware of the new ruling by the FTC. This does not cover one time promotions, if the review states that the product is a freebie, but rather continuing pattern of receiving free gifts secretly in exchange for reviews.



Diane

Post: #2

I wonder if they have defined what a blogger actually is? Does it include forum posters? Feature articles on your personal website? Or is it limited to what you wrote on designated blog sites? What about private blog areas like MySpace or FaceBook? If it's all of the above, this means if you test and write up any of the free togos from Androtics you'll have to have to include a legal disclaimer stating the product was given to you free.

Of course, short of an extensive investigation, how would the FTC know whether or you got the product free, stole it off a drunk or bought it? I wonder if those writing reviews of products they actually bought--most of us--will be compelled to prove they bought it and provider a legal disclaimer as well?

Now that I think of it, I really don't know what products Androtics gave to me free and which ones I bought. Most of the P series were samples, but I actually bought a bunch of them. Most of the products in glass 30ml bottles I bought, but several were freebies. So I'd only be guessing as to which was which...

Post: #3

Well I got most my stuff free but then again I did buy a bottle of each with my own money as well so I figure as long as I bought one thats the one I am reporting on LOL

If it extends to forum posters as well then they may have problems eventually over at PT but I cant see it being to much of a problem since they dont advertise the advanced products and the reporting is not with the intent to sell. Some people dont like there freebies and report on that as well so its a well rounded presentation of the product.

Tisha

Post: #4

I don't think it matters much, because it's just another regulation that they can't and won't enforce.

The FTC and the FCC both like to pass regulations that sound great on the surface, but then do little or nothing to enforce.

Does anybody remember the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003? Are you getting any less spam these days?

How about the Telecommunications Decency Act of 1996? Seeing any less porn these days?

And what about their biggest blunder ever: The breakup of AT&T in the 1974 Antitrust suit? Then the complete reversal with he Telecommunications Act in 1996. The end result was basically the destruction of an American Icon, as the companies started by Alexander Graham Bell in 1877 were forced to sell off part of their business to breakup a monopoly (which BTW was guaranteed to them by the Federal Government in exchange for the investment required to build the infrastructure) and allow for fair competition.

Then 22 years later came a complete reversal with the Federal Government allowing the now separate entities to venture into markets they were previously prohibited from entering, forcing those companies to wholesale services to each other, yet providing protections to the Baby Bells that weren't afforded to AT&T. The end result was AT&T first selling off it's long distance services, then later it's wireless services and existing the service side of the telecommunication industry!

We now have basically 2 players: The new AT&T (which is actually 5 or 6 of the originally Baby Bells that were merged and/or acquired by Southwestern Bell after the 1996 Act, and Verizon, which came into being after a merger between Atlantic Bell and GTE.

I think the FTC and the FCC are a couple of worthless entities that do more harm than good.

Post: #5

Maybe so.

But since I'm a manufacturer and advertiser who is sending out free samples, I would still like everyone who receives anything from me and reports on my products to disclose whether the product was purchased or a free sample.

And really, that is just fair business practice and what is wrong with that?

Since this is PheroTRUTH forum, and I'm certain that part of the formation of this forum was to give fair reporting on all pheromone products, I can't see where you would have a problem with that.

I certainly don't.

I don't think any regulations can go back and regulate what has happened in the past. So, I doubt anyone who posted reviews on free products in the past has anything to worry about. But it looks like they are going to be cracking down and really going after the advertisers.

Diane

Post: #6

Don't get me wrong Diane, I do not have a problem with the regulation and believe that it really should be in place. I just don't believe that the FTC will actually enforce it, with the exception of chasing down a few of the worst offenders and making examples of them, then it will become a dormant regulation like the Can-Spam Act.

I would actually love to see them chase down every one of these sites that claims to list and rate pheromone companies and suppliers! I just don't believe that it's going to happen.

Post: #7

I vaguely remember some mention of this a while ago (they say the knees are the first to go ). As I remember they mean the adverts on My Space and Facebook, not dedicated forums. A number of people were getting paid and free product in exchange for posting ads on those sites.

Post: #8

Since it's inception the Internet has been like the Wild West....virtually lawless. That's beginning to change, rapidly. As evidenced by the regulation the FTC will institute on Dec. 1, 2009.

Straight from the FTC -



Here's another article from Fox News...about Twitter.



As far as enforcing regulations, it may or may not happen. What will happen for sure is... "You are creating a precedent that people will be able to refer to. It only takes one litigant to open the path for others to follow." Ain't it the TRUTH.

We're a testing/reporting forum that gathers/provides anecdotal information on pheromones. We report on products whether or not they're free. We don't sell for anyone. We simply provide links to companies for interested parties. We are individual buyers, we are not a business. If I was a manufacture/advertiser I would comply with the new regulation. Another problem stems from people, who are reviewing these "free" products, being ignorant of the law. People will review products without stating that they have received them gratis.

I've seen many posts that have specified use of freebies. Freebies might be a nice gesture or given as a "reward" but they're definitely a marketing tool. It's not a crime......so far......it's what manufacturers/advertisers do. Companies are known to give free products to enthusiastic loyal supporters/promoters or simply to get people to try their products. As a consumer, the more info the better. It would be helpful, when reading a review, to know that that product was given as a freebie.

I believe the federal government has established ethical standards for dealing with businesses that they do business with and other corporations generally follow the guidelines established by the feds.

Whether or not the FTC chooses to enforce it is immaterial. The fact remains that this regulation is going to be in place. It's up to the manufacturer/advertiser/consumer to comply. If you are unaware or choose not to comply, then you run the risk of prosecution. It's that simple.

I've received a few free products from various companies and I've only reviewed the ones I've payed for. So there. Let the FTC go digging for proof I didn't.

I understand the need to protect yourself, Diane, and you should. When reporting on your copulin products, I have no problem stating if it's a free sample. Especially because you requested us to do so. It might be a good idea to post this request in your cops thread as well.


Bella

Post: #9

Thanks, Bella. I will do that.

I am sending out a ton of free samples tomorrow. I added a note to those asking that anyone who chose to share their experiences about these anywhere online, please disclose that they were a free gift.

First, I don't believe it is unethical to reward loyal customers with free gifts. There is nothing unethical with showing appreciation, through periodic gift giving, giving discounts, etc. That is just good business of taking care of your clients.

And I know I'm really small potatoes, and this regulation was probably thought up to stop certain unethical practices of companies that silently give bribes of, or payment with, large amounts of free products in exchange for giving word of mouth reviews and pushing their products.

And there is a distinctive, but fine line between customer loyalty built from being taken care of by the brand advertiser, and mouthpiece bought off with large amounts of freebies, and I think this legislation means to distinctly separate the two.

But small or large, a net doesn't care what size fish it catches unless it's holes are big enough. It looks to me like the holes in this net are to let the reviewer out and not the advertiser/manufacturer.

And I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure how much weight "intent" would hold in a lawsuit in a case like this.

But I think you are absolutely right about precedent.

Diane