Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This will actually endanger consumers, principally because people will feel invincible from fraud if they think fraudulent ratings are illegal. Never mind there's no real way to enforce it. Just like FDIC where people are abstracted from having to get educated on their bank's transparency. Another way for sheeple to have a false sense of protection.
And then it becomes highly suspect and circumstantial at that point. Just another game of "he said/she said".
Im sure you're not paid or otherwise compensated by vendors on your websites, but why would you denigrate the truth-in-advertising laws, and champion fraud?
Very strange.
Put it this way. Would you let your mother buy a product based on the enthusiastic recommendation of a website you know was paid to give that recommendation?
Im sure you're not paid or otherwise compensated by vendors on your websites, but why would you denigrate the truth-in-advertising laws, and champion fraud?
Very strange.
Put it this way. Would you let your mother buy a product based on the enthusiastic recommendation of a website you know was paid to give that recommendation?
I understand what you are saying and i'm not championing fraud. I just wonder how they intend to pick out the fraud from the non-fraud. I also think in the long run it's ultimately about collecting taxes and not for "the good of the consumer" as they seem to be putting it.
The FTC has long since wanted to regulate the internet (there's been talk of it for years). So now.. they are edging their way in that direction.
I understand what you are saying and i'm not championing fraud. I just wonder how they intend to pick out the fraud from the non-fraud. I also think in the long run it's ultimately about collecting taxes and not for "the good of the consumer" as they seem to be putting it.
The FTC has long since wanted to regulate the internet (there's been talk of it for years). So now.. they are edging their way in that direction.
Not related. This is only enforcing compliance with TIA law.
I didnt keep up with all the attempts through the years by various R lawmakers and their "sponsors" to regulate various means of commerce on the internet, though I remember reading often about it. I dont think the FTC was writing legislation so to do, although maybe it was, if it was headed by sympathetic Rs. I dont know.
I do know the current FCC will protect net neutrality.
The FTC makes a distinction between private citizens who are merely expressing their opinions and "professional bloggers" who are compensated for their endorsements. My understanding: basically, as long as you're honest, you can say whatever you want about a product, but you must disclose to your readers if you were compensated--either with money or free products--for offering your opinion.
I see this being a slippery slope on the path of the government trying to regulate EVERYTHING on the internet.
Other than NAMBLA sites. Because THEY protested and won.
Better to try to regulate suburban mom opinion rather than disgusting pedifiles who solicit they disgusting garbage that they do.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
