Should false advertising be a felony?

[Katganistan]

And what part of the advertisement do you feel is false?

"So eager to please, they can even be trained"

"Always clowning around, these frolicsome pets swim, stunt, and play games with each other."

Those.

Have you raised them? I have, to feed to bettas.
They absolutely swim around, appear to chase each other, and do flips and somersaults in water as they change direction for no apparent reason as they swim. So no, no false advertising there.

You can get them to swim towards a flashlight. This is in fact how they are harvested to feed to other fish. So yes, in a sense, they can be trained.

[The Anglo-American Commonwealth]

All advertising is misleading/false to some extent. For example, I'm sure most of us have encountered commercials or print advertisements from McDonald's or Burger King or some other fast food joint depicting a juicy, delectable burger. But when you get the end product, it won't often look nearly as delicious or might be haphazardly assembled. It's just spruced up for appeal - so you buy the product. Most people don't walk into a fast food restaurant expecting the tastiest meal of their life, but these businesses won't advertise their food for the junk it is lest they lose sales. Some advertisements are just so obviously false, no harm comes from them. No sane person believes Red Bull will give them wings - it's just a gimmick created for the product to be memorable.

I do think that false advertising should be illegal when harm would arise from it, like a product with tangible ill-health effects such as cigarettes. These companies should be forced to disclose the potential health problems from using their products, for instance. But where the line that separates harmful from unharmful false advertisements, I cannot say.

[Ethel mermania]

Technically you can brand something anything you like.. the Patagonian Toothfish, which few people would order on a menu, is rebranded Chilean Seabass.. yum yum.. even though it's not really seabass.

So you can brand name sea brine as Sea Monkeys, or whatever you want really. What you can't do is make false claims as to effect.. so Sea Monkeys - they cure cancer! would not be allowed. The definitions of 'play' or others in the Sea Monkey ad are too stretchy to be really counterclaimed.

X Ray spectacles, I mean I assume the claims are too vague really.

I do remember those ads from comic books, there was a spy kit as well that I felt would complement my life as an 8 year old.

I bought a pair of those glasses to look at little (name redacted to protect the innocent), and see under her dress, they didnt work,. 11 year old me was devistated. To this day it still haunts me.

(Cries).

[Ethel mermania]

"So eager to please, they can even be trained"

"Always clowning around, these frolicsome pets swim, stunt, and play games with each other."

Those.

Have you raised them? I have, to feed to bettas.
They absolutely swim around, appear to chase each other, and do flips and somersaults in water as they change direction for no apparent reason as they swim. So no, no false advertising there.

You can get them to swim towards a flashlight. This is in fact how they are harvested to feed to other fish. So yes, in a sense, they can be trained.

Gives new meaning to the term "come to the light".

[Des-Bal]

This isn't really false advertising so much as branding novelty products. It doesn't matter what the penalty for false advertising is if the thing you're trying to stop doesn't fit into it. I've never seen any indication that people were just falsely advertising and taking the penalty on the chin. Suits like that will absolutely gut your business.

All advertising is misleading/false to some extent. For example, I'm sure most of us have encountered commercials or print advertisements from McDonald's or Burger King or some other fast food joint depicting a juicy, delectable burger. But when you get the end product, it won't often look nearly as delicious or might be haphazardly assembled. It's just spruced up for appeal - so you buy the product. Most people don't walk into a fast food restaurant expecting the tastiest meal of their life, but these businesses won't advertise their food for the junk it is lest they lose sales. Some advertisements are just so obviously false, no harm comes from them. No sane person believes Red Bull will give them wings - it's just a gimmick created for the product to be memorable.

I do think that false advertising should be illegal when harm would arise from it, like a product with tangible ill-health effects such as cigarettes. These companies should be forced to disclose the potential health problems from using their products, for instance. But where the line that separates harmful from unharmful false advertisements, I cannot say.

Food advertising can be false. You can show a picture of ice cream that's actually just colored shortening because it looks creamy and it doesn't melt during long shoots. But, you can't say "look at how wonderfuly creamy this ice cream is" while a picture of the colored shortening is on screen.

What you're talking about is "puffery" it's just advertising shit that doens't mean anything. As to red bull, they DID get sued because they said "Redbull gives you wings" while showing people doing things that were athletic or strenuous.

[Community Values]

Yeah, claiming to cure cancer when it's just sugarpills should probably be illegal.
"Sea Monkeys", when stated that they are not actually monkeys in the sea, should be legal.

[-Ocelot-]

If you were dealing in stolen goods, you'd be in prison, literally taking it up the ass for the rest of your life. Or if you tried to run, you'd be shot. But for whatever reason, ill-gotten cash from scamming children doesn't have to be seized by the feds, because it's a "civil" offense.

Bad analogy since corporations have more rights than people in the US.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

Food advertising can be false. You can show a picture of ice cream that's actually just colored shortening because it looks creamy and it doesn't melt during long shoots.

You could always, you know, film the ice cream outdoors during the winter. This just sounds like a contrived excuse to let false advertisers get away with it.

Anyway, if false advertising lawsuits are really so damaging to a business, they've nothing to lose from a law that puts those responsible for false advertising in jail.

As to red bull, they DID get sued because they said "Redbull gives you wings" while showing people doing things that were athletic or strenuous.

Actually, that one was more about the claims about the supposed variety of stimulants.

Not that "Red Bull gives you wings" wasn't an incredibly annoying gimmick. I'd rather catch that in the crossfire than let false advertisers off the hook too easily.

[Katganistan]

Have you raised them? I have, to feed to bettas.
They absolutely swim around, appear to chase each other, and do flips and somersaults in water as they change direction for no apparent reason as they swim. So no, no false advertising there.

You can get them to swim towards a flashlight. This is in fact how they are harvested to feed to other fish. So yes, in a sense, they can be trained.

Gives new meaning to the term "come to the light".

And subsequently, "sleeping with the fishes."

[Des-Bal]

You could always, you know, film the ice cream outdoors during the winter. This just sounds like a contrived excuse to let false advertisers get away with it.

Anyway, if false advertising lawsuits are really so damaging to a business, they've nothing to lose from a law that puts those responsible for false advertising in jail.



Actually, that one was more about the claims about the supposed variety of stimulants.

Not that "Red Bull gives you wings" wasn't an incredibly annoying gimmick. I'd rather catch that in the crossfire than let false advertisers off the hook too easily.

Yes, you could in freezing conditions with bad lighting but there's no reason you should have to. It's not false advertising.

Except for a stupid and unnecessary prison sentence to deter a kind of behavior that's not all that common and already adequately addressed.

Actually I read the complaint, the issue was that their advertising supported the idea that Red Bull had some benefit, including increased stamina and physical performance more significant than drinking coffee. That was bolstered by their advertising.

You're making no sense. You do not have a coherent complaint here, there's no rampant issue of false advertising among major companies.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

Yes, you could in freezing conditions with bad lighting but there's no reason you should have to. It's not false advertising.

Then why'd you compare it to the brine shrimp case?

Also, modern cameras can handle cold weather.

Except for a stupid and unnecessary prison sentence to deter a kind of behavior that's not all that common and already adequately addressed.

Adequately addressed? I doubt that, when people are still fighting for the ill-gotten gains.

If it's so uncommon, wouldn't prison sentences over it also be uncommon?

Actually I read the complaint, the issue was that their advertising supported the idea that Red Bull had some benefit, including increased stamina and physical performance more significant than drinking coffee. That was bolstered by their advertising.

So were you saying the lawsuit was a valid one or not a valid one?

[Des-Bal]

Then why'd you compare it to the brine shrimp case?

Also, modern cameras can handle cold weather.


Adequately addressed? I doubt that, when people are still fighting for the ill-gotten gains.

If it's so uncommon, wouldn't prison sentences over it also be uncommon?



So were you saying the lawsuit was a valid one or not a valid one?

1. I didn't, I compared the food example to the ice cream. Also the sea monkeys weren't false advertising. Please follow the thread here, it's not false advertising to brand freeze dried brine shrimp as sea monkeys so if your unnecessary idea was implemented it wouldn't change anything. There is no reason to force people to jump through these ridiculous hoops when staging photos is easier.
2.They weren't ill-gotten, it's not false advertising.
3. Yes, prison sentences would also be uncommon. The problem is it's totally unnecessary. There is no reason to do the thing you're proposing.
4. The lawsuit was probably valid.

[Oresland]

Most advertising is false in some way, shape or form. Making it a felony won't really stop businesses from making false advertising. They'll just find another way to promote it.

[Minoa]

It depends on the context: in the case of Sea Monkeys I think it is too much of a novelty to slap a massive criminal prosecution on.

[Imperium Sidhicum]

As far as I'm concerned, it's a form of fraud, plain and simple, and fraud already is a felony.

[Katganistan]

Food advertising can be false. You can show a picture of ice cream that's actually just colored shortening because it looks creamy and it doesn't melt during long shoots.

You could always, you know, film the ice cream outdoors during the winter. This just sounds like a contrived excuse to let false advertisers get away with it.

Or you could be sensible and realize that people can't effectively take pictures bundled up, nor are people going to want to pose in summer clothes in 30 degree weather, and let them in fact take a picture of lard.

When you see a picture of someone modeling a shirt, is it false advertising because you're not the same size and it looks different on you? Or do you realize it's supposed to give you an idea of what it will look like on you?

[Katganistan]

As far as I'm concerned, it's a form of fraud, plain and simple, and fraud already is a felony.

I hope no one ever told you about Santa Claus. You might sue.

[Thermodolia]

No. That is a dumb idea OP and you should feel bad

[Ethel mermania]

As far as I'm concerned, it's a form of fraud, plain and simple, and fraud already is a felony.

I hope no one ever told you about Santa Claus. You might sue.

Sea Monkeys are silly. But do you remember geritol? Those people should have been sued if not jailed.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

As far as I'm concerned, it's a form of fraud, plain and simple, and fraud already is a felony.

I hope no one ever told you about Santa Claus. You might sue.

Honestly? That's pushing it as it is. It was used to convince kids someone's watching their behaviour, but it's hardly worth the damage in parental credibility. And really, it'd be better to use surveillance cameras in youth centers and at schools and parks in case some kids are faking belief in Santa anyway.

But those touting it eventually come clean, while corporate America keeps doing it until they're caught.

We've tried erring on the side of leniency, and the business world has walked all over the consumer. A broader definition of false advertising might be what it takes to rein them in.

[Hurdergaryp]

And ruin the childhood disappointment?

Important life lessons are had that way.

[Imperium Sidhicum]

As I understand, the legal definition of false advertising involves intentional deception or misinformation about the product's content and/or properties for the purpose of monetary gain, something which is also covered by the definition of fraud. Hence I don't see why false advertising should be treated as anything other than a form of fraud.

[Major-Tom]

Should drug use be a felony?

Christ, no.

[Des-Bal]

Honestly? That's pushing it as it is. It was used to convince kids someone's watching their behaviour, but it's hardly worth the damage in parental credibility. And really, it'd be better to use surveillance cameras in youth centers and at schools and parks in case some kids are faking belief in Santa anyway.

But those touting it eventually come clean, while corporate America keeps doing it until they're caught.

We've tried erring on the side of leniency, and the business world has walked all over the consumer. A broader definition of false advertising might be what it takes to rein them in.

No, they really haven't walked all over anyone. Established businesses don't like deceptive advertising because being publicly being known as lying dicks isn't worth it even without factoring in that you're basically going to hemorrhage money if you regularly engage in it.

[Katganistan]

I hope no one ever told you about Santa Claus. You might sue.

Honestly? That's pushing it as it is. It was used to convince kids someone's watching their behaviour, but it's hardly worth the damage in parental credibility. And really, it'd be better to use surveillance cameras in youth centers and at schools and parks in case some kids are faking belief in Santa anyway.

BIG BROTHER.... I mean, Santa Claus.... is watching YOU.