This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
23, the BBB National Programs’ Children’s Advertising Review Unit ( CARU ), the self-reg watchdog responsible for monitoring ads directed to people U13, issued a new compliance warning for advertising practices directed to children in the metaverse. ” Defining what we mean by “metaverse” is important.
For those who are new to this, the dot com guides (technically and annoyingly titled the “ com” guides) are a helpful source document to look at when you are trying to figure out how and when to make disclosures, particularly in digital advertising. This could have a significant impact on some advertising claims going forward.
Given that it took 26 months to get to a proposal, we would be willing to suggest another year, largely because the FTC has been pushed to address the alleged evils of kid influencers and is holding a workshop in October to gather more information. As expected, this proposal is not a revelation.
but also narrows the issues somewhat; the larger infringement, cybersquatting, and false advertising claims can’t be resolved on summary judgment. Defendant LHB is a former distributor now selling used Tasers that its owner refurbishes in his home workshop. logos on their materials to identify their socialmedia accounts.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content