4 ms·

Nope, your comparison is just not equivalent. A sale is a transfer of property. We enforce the implicit contract that goes along with that. The buyer will pay,

Nope, your comparison is just not equivalent. A sale is a transfer of property. We enforce the implicit contract that goes along with that. The buyer will pay, the seller will deliver, the product is accurate, etc. This discussion is about speech, for which no such contract exists. If you disagree, then you should have no problem arresting people for showing off a 3 watt bulb they claim to be 5 watts.

mjburgess 4y ago
Advertising is speech; there is no sale.
- LarryMullins 4y ago
  If there is to be no sale, then is it really advertising at all? If I "advertise" that I own a thing with no intention of selling that thing, then laws about honest advertisement don't apply to me. My car (not for sale) has a nuclear reactor and can travel through time.
  - mjburgess 4y ago
    yes
    - LarryMullins 4y ago
      No, not in a sense that triggers truth in advertising laws.
      - tremon 4y ago
        If you advertise a product without intent to sell, you're also breaking truth in advertising laws: you're selling vaporware.
  - Sakos 4y ago
    FTC https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/advertising-faqs-guide-small-business https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/advertising-... Counter-example: > What can my company do if a competitor is running an ad that I think is deceptive? > Explore your legal options under federal and state statutes that protect businesses from unfair competition. For example, the Lanham Act gives companies the right to sue their competitors for making deceptive claims in ads. > Are advertising agencies subject to the FTC Act? > Yes. In addition to the advertiser, the advertising agency also may be held legally responsible for misleading claims in ads. Advertising agencies have a duty to make an independent check on the information used to substantiate ad claims. They may not rely on an advertiser's assurance that the claims are substantiated. I don't see anything about false advertising requiring a sale.
NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
Holy false equivalent, Batman! The poster's point was pretty simple: there is some speech which doesn't deserve to be fully protected to the highest possible level. Untrue commercial speech like false advertising is pretty much in that category. This is why we allow attorneys-general to bring cases against false advertisers, for example. Usually the remedy is monetary damages, but injunctive relief is also available. I can easily maintain that this is sensible and reasonable without "arresting people for showing a 3 watt bulb they claim to be 5 watts."
- alphanullmeric 4y ago
  Is there a sale or not? If there's not a sale it's not advertising. If it's not advertising it should be allowed, false or not. If it is advertising it's not just speech. You lack the consistency to make your argument work. So again, I guess you're fine with arresting people over light bulbs.
  - sjsdaiuasgdia 4y ago
    > If there's not a sale it's not advertising. This is a really strange perspective. Advertising is only advertising once the advertised product is sold? A billboard is simultaneously an advertisement and not an advertisement depending on whether the observer has purchased the advertised item? Not the GP but no, I'm not fine with arresting people over light bulbs. I am totally cool with arresting them for fraud if it meets that standard. I am also cool with the business being fined or otherwise sanctioned for false advertisement. The product is beside the point. The deception is what the punishment is intended to address.
    - alphanullmeric 4y ago
      There’s an implicit conversion between intent to sell and actually selling. For there to be advertising, one of the two has to be true. If I’m showing off my car, am I advertising anything?
      - 4y ago
VanTheBrand 4y ago
You are getting lost in the weeds of an imperfect metaphor.
- alphanullmeric 4y ago
  But I have a perfect metaphor. Should it be illegal to post a picture of a 3 watt bulb, captioned as 5 watts?
  - dividedbyzero 4y ago
    Depends on the context. If it's part of an ad for a lightbulb you're actually selling, yes. If it's a stupid meme, no.
Teever 4y ago
People can be victims of false advertising even if they don't actually complete a transaction with the offender.
- bentlegen 4y ago
  “These other products give you cancer! Only use Febreze to mask odours in your home.” viewer goes and tosses out all their presumably-cancer causing products, never purchases Febreze
  - monetus 4y ago
    In a similar vein, there is a "fruits and veggies" vitamins commercial that advocates skipping meals to afford the vitamins, as they give you all you need.
jliptzin 4y ago
Not a lawyer but I could imagine a situation where you're in a store and you see an advertisement for a blue light bulb that says that blue light bulbs are proven to disinfect surfaces. You remember you have some blue light bulbs at home, so you go home and screw them in. Or maybe you go on amazon and order some blue light bulbs because they're cheaper, even though different brands are not making that claim, the first one tricked you into thinking it was true. You haven't entered into any contract with the manufacturer making that false claim, yet you are still harmed by it.
- spoiler 4y ago
  Right, but people (and companies) lie all the time, and it's not something that's illegal. It's amoral, but not illegal. I'm not sure where I stand on the matter personally. Like, taking the constant social turmoil in America as an example: anything people dislike they call disinformation/fake news, but are equally guilty and okay with of spreading and allowing the same behaviour if it furthers their agenda. Or they will at least be more lenient to their side of the arguments indulging in it, since it aligns with their biases. I've seen this happen from both right wing and left wing members one Twitter and on Reddit. I personally don't use these platforms, but I've seen various threads with insane amounts of hypocrisy. There's so many nuance and unresolved problems. Like, how do we know truth isn't what's being censored? How can we even tell in this day and age when the truth is? It's often diluted with some hidden agenda. Either political or corporate (or oftentimes both). I can't sit for hours fact checking everything I read from different sources. I have a job, and I also don't want to spend all my free time on it. But on the other hand it's also topic I care about (just not THAT much I guess?). Who to trust? And I feel like this "the ones in power control what's true" generally feels like a slippery slope. I also hate that I'm beginning to sound like a crazy tinfoil-wearing person. Idk, humans are complicated. Social media in its current iteration was a mistake, since it created platforms for some very dangerous and narcissistic people

mjburgess 4y ago

Advertising is speech; there is no sale.

LarryMullins 4y ago
If there is to be no sale, then is it really advertising at all? If I "advertise" that I own a thing with no intention of selling that thing, then laws about honest advertisement don't apply to me. My car (not for sale) has a nuclear reactor and can travel through time.
- mjburgess 4y ago
  yes
  - LarryMullins 4y ago
    No, not in a sense that triggers truth in advertising laws.
    - tremon 4y ago
      If you advertise a product without intent to sell, you're also breaking truth in advertising laws: you're selling vaporware.
- Sakos 4y ago
  FTC https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/advertising-faqs-guide-small-business https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/advertising-... Counter-example: > What can my company do if a competitor is running an ad that I think is deceptive? > Explore your legal options under federal and state statutes that protect businesses from unfair competition. For example, the Lanham Act gives companies the right to sue their competitors for making deceptive claims in ads. > Are advertising agencies subject to the FTC Act? > Yes. In addition to the advertiser, the advertising agency also may be held legally responsible for misleading claims in ads. Advertising agencies have a duty to make an independent check on the information used to substantiate ad claims. They may not rely on an advertiser's assurance that the claims are substantiated. I don't see anything about false advertising requiring a sale.

NovemberWhiskey 4y ago

Holy false equivalent, Batman! The poster's point was pretty simple: there is some speech which doesn't deserve to be fully protected to the highest possible level. Untrue commercial speech like false advertising is pretty much in that category. This is why we allow attorneys-general to bring cases against false advertisers, for example. Usually the remedy is monetary damages, but injunctive relief is also available. I can easily maintain that this is sensible and reasonable without "arresting people for showing a 3 watt bulb they claim to be 5 watts."

alphanullmeric 4y ago
Is there a sale or not? If there's not a sale it's not advertising. If it's not advertising it should be allowed, false or not. If it is advertising it's not just speech. You lack the consistency to make your argument work. So again, I guess you're fine with arresting people over light bulbs.
- sjsdaiuasgdia 4y ago
  > If there's not a sale it's not advertising. This is a really strange perspective. Advertising is only advertising once the advertised product is sold? A billboard is simultaneously an advertisement and not an advertisement depending on whether the observer has purchased the advertised item? Not the GP but no, I'm not fine with arresting people over light bulbs. I am totally cool with arresting them for fraud if it meets that standard. I am also cool with the business being fined or otherwise sanctioned for false advertisement. The product is beside the point. The deception is what the punishment is intended to address.
  - alphanullmeric 4y ago
    There’s an implicit conversion between intent to sell and actually selling. For there to be advertising, one of the two has to be true. If I’m showing off my car, am I advertising anything?
    - 4y ago

VanTheBrand 4y ago

You are getting lost in the weeds of an imperfect metaphor.

alphanullmeric 4y ago
But I have a perfect metaphor. Should it be illegal to post a picture of a 3 watt bulb, captioned as 5 watts?
- dividedbyzero 4y ago
  Depends on the context. If it's part of an ad for a lightbulb you're actually selling, yes. If it's a stupid meme, no.

Teever 4y ago

People can be victims of false advertising even if they don't actually complete a transaction with the offender.

bentlegen 4y ago
“These other products give you cancer! Only use Febreze to mask odours in your home.” viewer goes and tosses out all their presumably-cancer causing products, never purchases Febreze
- monetus 4y ago
  In a similar vein, there is a "fruits and veggies" vitamins commercial that advocates skipping meals to afford the vitamins, as they give you all you need.

jliptzin 4y ago

Not a lawyer but I could imagine a situation where you're in a store and you see an advertisement for a blue light bulb that says that blue light bulbs are proven to disinfect surfaces. You remember you have some blue light bulbs at home, so you go home and screw them in. Or maybe you go on amazon and order some blue light bulbs because they're cheaper, even though different brands are not making that claim, the first one tricked you into thinking it was true. You haven't entered into any contract with the manufacturer making that false claim, yet you are still harmed by it.

spoiler 4y ago
Right, but people (and companies) lie all the time, and it's not something that's illegal. It's amoral, but not illegal. I'm not sure where I stand on the matter personally. Like, taking the constant social turmoil in America as an example: anything people dislike they call disinformation/fake news, but are equally guilty and okay with of spreading and allowing the same behaviour if it furthers their agenda. Or they will at least be more lenient to their side of the arguments indulging in it, since it aligns with their biases. I've seen this happen from both right wing and left wing members one Twitter and on Reddit. I personally don't use these platforms, but I've seen various threads with insane amounts of hypocrisy. There's so many nuance and unresolved problems. Like, how do we know truth isn't what's being censored? How can we even tell in this day and age when the truth is? It's often diluted with some hidden agenda. Either political or corporate (or oftentimes both). I can't sit for hours fact checking everything I read from different sources. I have a job, and I also don't want to spend all my free time on it. But on the other hand it's also topic I care about (just not THAT much I guess?). Who to trust? And I feel like this "the ones in power control what's true" generally feels like a slippery slope. I also hate that I'm beginning to sound like a crazy tinfoil-wearing person. Idk, humans are complicated. Social media in its current iteration was a mistake, since it created platforms for some very dangerous and narcissistic people