Blog Disclaimer As Per The New FTC Guidelines

Lol! I love that little disclaimer you threw in the about not being a lawyer. That made my day! ;P

I’m glad that I reside in Canada and not the U.S. The new disclaimers and disclosures required by the FTC are, in most cases, “pushing the envelope of freedom to do business”. Maybe WalMart and any brick and mortar retailer should have similar signage as you enter the store and at every cashier. If I receive compensation from another source for promoting their product, or if I receive it for free and resell it, then this is my business – nobody else’s. It is an absolute and blatant attack on capitalism – the very financial structure that the USA is supposed to be famous for. Would WalMart, or other retailer, state “Are you sure you want to buy this? You could get it for free somewhere else, or cheaper. Do you know that we paid less for this than you are paying?”. I know that is not the wording we have to use, but it is implied. It strikes at the very heart of competition and the right to do business. All that said, I fully agree that fake testimonial claims and insane high unreal check/cheque pics are the next best thing to fraud and deception – and should be stopped. I also fully believe in ethical business practices – my own main business sells courses on ethics to the financial services industry here in Canada. I am appalled by totally unrealistic claims of attaining great wealth “just by doing this or that” and “You’ll be making $10,000 in 30 days”. But I also believe that it is up to the purchaser/buyer to judge for themselves and use common sense – just like they have to do in the non-digital marketplace. They need to do their due-diligence before purchasing any digital product for resale – even then you never know if you are purchasing copyrighted material that you could be prosecuted for reselling. I have a case personally of a graphics (PLR) package I purchased a few years ago where one of the buyers of my resold package has been threatened court action (by a major image vendor) or pay a huge sum of money for using one of the images on their website from that package, even though they removed it immediately on notice from the image copyright holder. Stop the fraud and deception but let business do business without all these disclosures and restriction of trade.

Thanks John. There are others(with less moral compass) that are charging up to $297 for this same info.

That clears it up a bit. All this works for websites. I’m working how it works for radio or other advertising where the space is limited.

If I have and Adwords ad that makes a claim, I assume I can put disclaimers and such in my landing page. There is no way to do that in the ad itself.

John,

Thanks for the list of possible disclaimers. There is a lot of mixxed info out there and this certainly helps clarify.

John, the crooks in our midst have very little to fear from this new regulation interpretation. Consider the number of websites, then think of the number of FTC employees, and you realize that unless someone complains it is unlikely that a particular website will be visited by an FTC employee.

For those of us who are trying to run a moral operation, the interpretation presents no obstacle, it levels the playing field a little. It just more clearly defines what we should share with our potential clients.

I expect people to understand that I am doing this to make money. I have no problem with reminding them of it, as long as everyone else is following the same rule.

I love your concise disclaimers. I will be using one or more of them with some slight modification to meet my particular needs.

The danger is not in the FTC. Within months I expect entrepreneurial lawyers to start filing class action law suits by the hundreds. They will then call you and say “We can make this all go away for $________.” The amount they pick will be based on what it will cost you to defend the case. This FTC ruling is a gold mine for the lawyers. We are pulling all financial references out of our sites – no more claims of ‘how much you can make’ until we see the dust clear.

We ignored the fax law suits in 2003 until we got 9 class action lawyers who sued us for one billion in 87 counties all at one time. We had no choice but to file BK and settle in Federal court.

Our net worth went from 7million positive to 2million negative over 3 years of legal battles.

This entire FTC thing is another gift to trial lawyers. Good Luck
KC Truby

John,

How is this going to affect sites outside the USA that advertise in USA?

John, Thanks for your update and putting some of your own spiel to these claims. I like two of your disclaimers for my own business and will use them with some modification.
I really think some bloggers and web masters have blown all this out of proportion. Consequently, scaring some marketers out of this business. The FTC isn’t bringing these new rules to the general public so that leaves those of us in this business to work within the guide lines set by the FTC. If you’re honest and above board I don’t see any problems. It’s when you try to deceive the consumer that the FTC has a problem.
Keep on looking out for us, I appreciate your due diligence.
Regards,
Hal

Determining what the “typical” results of a product are is no easy task. In most cases a business would have to hire a survey and research company to accurately determine the “typical” results consumers get from their products.

If you are selling a piece of exercise equipment, most people who buy it will never even use it; many others will use it one or twice and quit. Do these customers have to be included in the “typical” results??

What if you are selling a course on how to make money in real estate investing? Again, most customers won’t even read the first page. Others will read it and take no action. Some will apply the techniques as a part time hobby; others will quit their jobs and become full-time investors. Which of these is the “typical” customer?

Thanks John,

I went through this process recently. I am from Canada, and at first thought I didn’t need to concern myself with this stuff. I soon realized that because my websites target US visitors as well, I do need to adhere to these new rules. The most “bullet Proof” way to make sure you cross your T’s and dot your I’s is to hire a lawyer to prepare these statements for your websites. Obviously the challenge here is the costs, not all of us can afford to spend that kind of money. So, I think (I am not a lawyer), that if we, as blog/website owners show an effort in Due Diligence, then we should be ok. To show an effort, we read blog posts such as this one, we read the FTC writings and try to understand what it is saying (which you do perfectly here) and we create policies for our sites that we feel are appropriate and encompass the rules as we understand them.
As is stated above, the FTC simply does not have the resources to chase after every site out there. If they come across one of my sites, my hope/expectation is that either they will very quickly look at my policies and decide my site is covered, or they will inform me of my sites deficiencies with an expectation that I will fix it by a specified date. It is evident that I have exercised some effort in Due Diligence, which is so much better than so many of the crooks and real scam sites will. And ultimately the poor FTC employees will be working very very hard to deal with the plethora of scam sites that currently exist. I think this is great! I would love to see many of those sites taken down as they give honest marketers and the Internet/affiliate marketing industry as a whole, a bad name. Personally, I want an honest business, I don’t have any interest in Scamming people, I want to follow the rules. The FTC rules, I think, are a good move to raise the confidence of internet users.

Thanks for the post John,

Jeromy
http://twitter.com/JeromyS

Thanks John for clarify the FTC Guidelines. Just to the point, no more no less. There are a psychosis for the new rules. If you do all in the right way you will never have problems.
Rosemarie

John,
Here is what I would like to say, but I guess I would get slammed for it somehow: “If you can’t get off your lazy ass and work you will not make any money.” I get really tired of people who won’t work for a living and blame you for all their failures. I have to agree with the poster above. The FTC is going to make some lawyer rich.

James Cousineau is so right on and I hope to God KC Truby is wrong.

John,

You provided very clear direction and much appreciated.

I also have added a disclaimer or announcement in all of my emails that go out from my aweber account. I asked my graphic designer (yes from the Philippines) to create a compensated affiliate graphic that I could add to my site and added a disclaimer to my privacy policy as well. Trying to be covered from all angles.

This law was written and enacted by a bunch of lawyers for the BENEFIT OF LAWYERS. It’s a prime example of why our country can’t compete with the rest of the world. I hate scam artists but the laws our government enact to protect us are more detrimental to our society than the scams.

Great stuff, John! Wowzers, I love how concise yet robust your posts are, dude!

Another quick thought would be that, with whatever “standard” disclaimers/disclosure you use to comply (and I love yours above) to put something like…

“This Website Complies with the Standard Uniform Disclaimer:”

at the top…just to maybe take any potential edge off it a bit from the consumer’s perspective. I figure the more “standard” and “uniform” it appears, the less alarming it might seem, and the more likely they’ll (correctly) assume it’s no big deal really.

Also, correctly formatted, this is the kind of thing in which “ad blindness” could work to a similar advantage…especially if a number of folks in the same industry were to begin assuming a similar look/feel/text/logo with it.

Just some more thoughts anyways.

Thanks again!

…jp

How prevalent does the disclosure have to be. Must it be on every page of the site or can it be tucked away in a disclosures page or something similar?

Also, do these rules only apply if one “endorses” a product or service? How about if the product or service is merely mentioned but not specifically endorsed?

John, Thanks for the post. My take… This is another set of ambiguous arbitrary rules that will be enforced by life-long un-elected federal employees.

If the federal employee has an issue with you… tough. It’s not black and white and as usual… just another over-reach of power that erodes our Liberty.

I listened to an audio done with the FTC Assistant Deputy and he was basically making it up as he went. He was reviewing examples of online marketing and making “judgment” calls on each case. He was all over the board and also “influenced” by the interviewer.

My point? Again, it’s not black and white and if the FTC targets you… too bad.

Not to worry though. We know federal employees leave their ego checked at the door.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. I don;t any of those in this administration to do anything but take away our freedoms…sometimes incrementally…sometimes in your face.

Thank you for the information on the new FCC rules. I was undecided whether or not I needed disclaimers on my Wordpress blogs but after reading your post I feel the safest thing to do will be to add them.

Think you can come up with a good disclaimer for a product? >

I’m stumped! This “typical results” thing is AWFUL for products that rely heavily on how well a person can follow directions and have patience!

John,

This is the best explanation of the new FTC rules I have read. Also, I really liked the way you gave examples. That means a TON!!

Essentially, this has been blown out of proportion by a lot of people. Disclose, be ethical and hire an attorney. If you’re in business and not ALREADY doing these things, you’re in trouble

Thanks for this info. I have been to other blogs similar to mine but none of them have a disclaimer but I still think I will put one on anyway so that I won’t be sorry later.

Seems you left out an item that could be crucial: testimonials must be current and attributable.

In other words – mine, not the FTC’s – you cannot use a testimonial from years agone, nor one from someone who no longer uses the product.

And you have to have a traceable record such that you can establish contact with the testimonial author for validation/verification.

BTW, have you noticed the changes in TV advertising [in the US] lately? Particularly. pharmaceutical & cosmetic ads? Small, but pretty significant.

[...] the new FTC guidelines, I am sure various businesses are scrambling to ensure their operations are in compliance. Lets [...]

Good post, Jonas. There have been many misconceptions about the recent FTC rulings. Thanks for giving the example site disclaimers

Have you guys seen the disclosures that Tim Ferriss is now using? Hilarious! And he has given us permission to use his graphics also. With attribution of course.

http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/ftc-disclosure-blog/

Thanks Jonas for sharing this. Being new to the scene I didn’t want to underestimate how much I needed to do with the disclaimers. I felt that disclosing product or monetary compensation was necessary. But it did seem like a lot of people were panicking for no reason. This even gave product creators/affiliate marketers opportunity to make more money from it. Bloggers /affiliate marketers and such should not be trying to panic one another into buying a product when they could be writing their own. So I applaud you and thank you for offering this information to us.

My first post was more of a rant on restriction of trade than a commentary of your article on using disclaimers. No apology as such articles are bound to spark dialogue.

That said, your article is well done. It states what should be stated under the new FTC rulings, restrictive as they are. Personally, as a non U.S. resident, I will ignore any such requirements except for what I normally, and ethically, put on my websites.

The FTC, in their zeal to stop the flow of scam artists and misleading and deceptive claims, have tried to regulate an industry that is still young and rapidly growing. This is really like trying to nail jelly to a wall, as the saying goes. But, in their well intended efforts, they have created a digital roadway laden with “lawyer” bombs ready to explode at will. I am sure the legal profession is eagerly waiting for their first chance to use these rulings to raise their profile in public court civil suits.

This reminds me of a few years ago, up here in Canada, when one of our governments tried to impose sales tax on garage sale items. After much media coverage and laughs from every corner of society, it quietly slipped away to obscurity, never to happen.

I also realize that most people do not read disclaimers, or “safe harbors” as they are more referred to. Do you read all that fine print at the bottom of a page? I can see the future demanding disclaimers at the beginning and not in fine print. I hope somebody has the tenacity and financial resources to challenge such unnecessary disclosures. What I pay for the products I resell is nobody’s business but my own – such is capitalism. If I get it for free and resell it, so be it. Many traditional retailers do this already. Wholesaler offers “Buy 10 cases get 2 free”. Should the retailer disclose that they got some for free and are charging you for it? Retailer “A” buys for 50 cents while retailer “B” pays $1.20. Should retailer “B” tell his customers that they can get the same thing somewhere else cheaper?

If these rulings were carried over to the traditional retail sector the major newspapers and TV stations would be ablaze with front line stories of dictatorial rule over free enterprise and capitalism.

Again, I state that scam websites and untrue claims should be taken down and charged if need be. Unfortunately many resell products come with ready-made websites that contain all these mis-truths and the well-intended reseller, not knowing how to edit – or even why – gets caught in the middle.

Now I ask these questions – your comments on this, John, might be a good blog topic ….:

- How do we know that PLR products are safe to use? Really! Without going to a lawyer and hiring a private investigator. Even then, how would a lawyer know? Most lawyers I know hardly know how to read emails and use a browser let alone advise on Internet law and wordings to be used. Try finding an “Internet savvy” lawyer .. a dare ya!

- What about MRR and RR products?

- What about all these great graphics and video packages being offered for sale?

- What does it really mean to the IM industry as a whole, especially in the U.S.A.?

- Will it simply drive many to being an off-shore (U.S. shore) pirate business? Making pirates from previously law abiding citizens?

Some may say that I am over-reacting. Am I? I don’t think so. The legal battlefield is being setup as we “blog” our posts. The FTC is giving ammunition to copyright holders to prosecute as they see fit (I’m all for copyright, but now it opens the doors even wider).

There you go … all food for thought. Now back to the regular programming (excuse the pun).

[...] – the bloggers don’t get paid but they don’t have to buy tickets. As of this year, bloggers must disclose that they were compensated (or got free products), per FTC rules. They have to Bloggers will find [...]

I question if your footer disclaimer is sufficient. IMO, the FTC word has said “prominent” position and in some cases it could be argued it has to be above-the-fold.

I've seen reference a number of times within this post, that putting yourself offshore (USA) then you will be safe from the reach of the FTC. Let me tell you, YOU ARE NOT. IF ANY OF YOUR PRODUCTS ARE BEING PURCHASED WITHIN THE USA, YOU ARE LIABLE!!! As in the case of the British gentleman living in Australia selling products within the USA's borders. Fined 100's of thousands of dollars and facing, I believe, a 5 year jail sentence! You've been warned!
One point that really bothers me though is that if you have your own product that is being sold by affiliates and they misrepresent the product i.e. false claims to sell the item. Then as I understand it, you, as the producer/ copyright holder are LIABLE. How can you possibly monitor, potentially hundreds of affiliate marketers from being unscrupulous? Is there a disclosure agreement that can protect you from this situation between the two parties?

Finally, I see this as a great opportunity for honest marketers to forge ahead, as long as due diligence is applied, as the unscrupulous sites (competition) will fade away.

I fail to see how a USA regulatory authority has any jurisdiction in another country. They can impose fines if they want, but how would they enforce them – or even, as you mention, manage to get local legal authorities to impose jail sentences? Please back up your statement with at least a URL validating this.

John,

Thanks for your disclaimer examples. It's so good to know that there are still people out there like you who continue to serve the industry by giving away valuable information for free. Appreciate you!

I have been told taht the Brit who is being charged, was extradited from Australia to the USA under provisions of the Free Trade Agreement between Australia and the USA..
If you are going to operate off shore of the USA make sure you are operating in a country that does not have extradition treaties with the USA.
Better still do what is being requested.
Do not set yourself up as a target for the lawyers. Operate as a business that does not have sufficient assets to be worth being sued. Do not have assets held in your own name. The lawyers will generally pick the easy targets.

I hope I am wrong too. But I am old and I have experiance. If anyone asks us today "How much can I make?" We simply say 'who knows, but if you get one customer in ___ years it pays off so I don't see how you can go wrong with our information product." We are not in a political enviroment today where lawyers are held at bay. The class action and out of court settlement is a game – and we are the pawns.

Thank you, John, for this helpful post with disclaimer examples.

Thanks John, your help about FTC is really valuable.
I'm italian but I've all my selling pages with FTC disclaimers.
I made a new page to add all disclaimers, otherwise is more long the FTC disclaimer's page than the rest of salesletter !

Thanks and goodbye, I will share your page link in Facebook and Twitter.
Alessandr Zamboni

Thanks John,
Having some experience in getting a letter from the lawyers of a large corporation threatening legal action I would say make every effort you can to do the right thing AND comply with the regulations. In this case I wasn't even the guilty party and I was finally able to show the lawyers that and everything was resolved successfully. So unless you have lots of money and time to waste all of the ranting and raving about how unfair it is or how it is an attack on the American free market just so much hot air. Look at the situation as it is, not how you want it to be and deal with it.

My question is does anyone know what exactly "equal prominence" means? Back a few years ago a lawyer successfully argued that equal prominence meant that the disclaimer for a product being sold had to be made in the same size of type etc as the sales claim was made in. Thanks
All the best,
Ted

Hey thanks John! It was very helpful!

What about making a counter offensive ?

What about starting a blog disclosing and explaining how dishonest people and lawyers are using the law to make money rather than to make justice ?

What about gathering some tips and knowledge on how to avoid this and helping people caught such obviously money-orentied trials ?

What about exposing the many and many law suit examples which results are so unfair, unreal and stupid, that at some point the situation will have to change ?

This can be a sort of wikileaks for law (name ideas : "lawleaks.com" or "lawflaws,com" or "lawhole.com").

I am a European living in Europe, so I am not much concerned about this and I am not the right person to start this, but what happens with the "law buisiness" in the US seems so crazy to me that I think at some point US citizens have to make something to stop it and defend their basic right to live in a fair and reasonable society.

Hi John,
Thanks for this information! I was wondering specifically about review sites, and whether the FTC has guidelines about reviewing products. Specifically, I guess, is if you haven't actually purchased the product, can you still write a review without getting into trouble with the FTC? How should that be handled?

Thanks for your help. Your posts are always helpful.

IHOPE TO RECH TRANSILATION FROM ARABIC TO ENGLISH

[...] we refer people to often is John Jonas’ blog.  He adds in some humor when talking about these changes.  But [...]

It just NEVER stops. Like we don't have enough government now. Thanks for the hot tips! These will go on some of my websites, even though I tell the truth on MY websites. A few bad apples….