Do Old WSOs Have to Be Edited By Dec 1 for FTC Compliance?

From my understanding, yes. Unless the author/merchant can verify his claims and indicates what the "average" user can expect in terms of results.

OTOH, I believe that the new regulations are complaints-driven, which means that WSO's might not even make it onto the FTC's radar unless they start getting complaints about them.

And as always, not a lawyer. Just my interpretation.

Well thats up to Allen.

I am sure the FTC are going to go after the bigger fish but we will see.

Why would an expired/closed WSO need to altered?

Ron,

That's a simple, but interesting question. (Which means that the simpler the question, the more difficult it is to answer )

So, after reading your question, the following occurred to me.

The WSO forum isn't your local newspaper, isn't your local TV station, isn't a magazine on a newstand, isn't a cable network, TV network, or a late-night shopping channel, etc.

You're talking about a paid advertising section of a privately owned forum that isn't really a general public advertising outlet (or is it?).

I'm not sure a WSO would fall under the new rules at all unless, as the previous post said, the FTC gets a bunch of complaints. I would think you could hype up a WSO all you want.

However, the minute you add a line to your WSO copy that says, "See the full sales page here" that links to your page on the web, now your sales hype is available to every consumer that sees it. That would surely make it fall under the new rules.

hmmm. As I think about it a little more, I may have actually added more questions to your question instead of answering it.

The FTC won't come after you... and if they do, they'll tell you to take it down first.

And from what I know... the latest FTC stuff is for testimonials anyways.

If the WSO is still capable of attracting business, then yes, it will need to be in compliance. If your old WSO is no longer accepting purchases, it would be wise to close it if it is not in compliance.

Probably not just big fish.

They will want to catch and make examples of a few sardines.

I'm certainly not a lawyer - in fact I don't even dress like one. So with that said...

Look at what Jeff Walker is doing. After this latest blast for PLF, he is going to take down all the case studies - which of course are testimonials from folks with the largest success in using his product.

I'm afraid Ron's point about the WF being a top site on the net is right on target. I would think some of these WSO headlines could be a problem for those selling the WSO, but, even more of a problem for Allen. It's his site.

BTW - If I go put on clothes that make me look like an attorney, will that help?

:-Don

It doesn't matter how popular a site is, whether it's the top site on the Web or the last site on the internet. All ads on all sites are subject to compliance.

It wouldn't surprise me if the FTC already has a list of people they will target to make an example of. If they dont comply by dec 1 then they will be made an example of, just to let the lesser guys know they are serious.

I would never USE a title like "Make $2000 in 3 days", unless i am 100% certain that it works [otherwise i wouldnt use such a title in the first place!]....so the only ones negatively affected would be people making false claims and scammers.

You dont make a WSO and claim such things..and then IN the WSO tell people the earnings are way lower or the numbers are only a rare exception. Certainly a red flag.

Ron, maybe it's just me. But I don't think those kind of headlines belong in the WSO forum anyway - FTC or not.


Frank

I'm sure Allen will put a blanket disclaimer on the site since he too makes money from links.

There is a 'publish date' on every post. Just as Cosmopolitan isn't coming to your house to make sure you don't have any of the pre-FTC old guideline ads in one of their magazines... don't know, but think pre 12/01 posts fall under the old guidelines. (but not under the lax enforcing of them. Some of the guides were not really 'new' merely better explained, not much better, but a little better. Lol)

(See a lawyer)

If the WSO thread is 10,000 posts, I hardly think they will get changed in a couple of days anyway. (The board deleted and re-created maybe.)

There are still sites selling bogus (or at least questionable) medical remedies that were published by someone prosecuted for them, still up and partially functioning. (Though the product never arrives and your credit card is not charged) but the questionable information is still there. Apparently the FTC was more interested in prosecution than actually removing information that might lead people astray.

I know publication date has a bearing, just don't know how much. I'll ask my trademark lawyer Monday... (the 1st. Lol.)

My understanding is that Allen enjoys the same protection his host does and the culpability is with the person that made the post. Again, see a lawyer. I said to see a lawyer so much, I wasn't really any help at all. :S

That would be nice to see them change come Dec. 1st. Not so many bull**** titles anymore.

Everybody say it with me

(To the tune of Usa-Usa-Usa)

"ftc, ftc, ftc, ftc"

Come ON guys! All this fear over the FTC is really starting to bug me, Theres nothing wrong with enforcing more ethical guidelines on modern advertising.

That said, I dont think discontinued products apply to the new FTC rulings.