Photo of Ted Max

Ted Max

Subscribe to Ted Max's Posts

Theodore C. Max is a partner in the Entertainment, Technology and Advertising and Intellectual Property Practice Groups in the New York office.

Contact:Read more about Ted Max

The Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) Endorsement Guides have evolved over the past forty years from regulating celebrity endorsements and testimonial advertisements to policing social media advertising, including influencer endorsements and native advertising. On February 12, 2020, the FTC announced that it had voted 5‑0 to approve a proposed Federal Register Notice, seeking comment on whether to make changes to its Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising (“the Endorsement Guides”), which were enacted in 1980[1] and amended in 2009,[2] as part of a systematic review of all current FTC rules and practices. The Endorsement Guides have steadfastly required transparency in advertising and, if there is a connection between an endorser and the company selling the product or services being advertised or promoted which, if disclosed, might affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement, such connection must be disclosed clearly and conspicuously.Continue Reading FTC Finalizes Revisions to the Endorsement Guides, Proposes New Rule for Consumer Reviews and Testimonials and Updates FTC Staff Guidance

On May 18, 2023, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of famed rock photographer Lynn Goldsmith against the Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc.’s (AWF),[1] in a long-awaited decision impacting fair use under Section 107(1) of the Copyright Act. The opinion written by Justice Sotomayor, in which Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett and Jackson joined, held that the “purpose and character” of AWF’s commercial use of Warhol’s portraits of Prince shared the same commercial purpose of the original photograph taken by Ms. Goldsmith and, as a result, did not constitute fair use.[2] The Court’s decision affirmed the ruling of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that the Warhol work was derivative of the original, and noted that “the new expression may be relevant to whether a copying use has a sufficiently distinct purpose or character” but that factor was not dispositive by itself.[3] The Court found that the Warhol Foundation’s licensing of the Orange Prince to Conde Nast did not have a sufficiently different purpose as the Goldsmith photograph because both were “portraits of Prince used in magazines to illustrate stories about Prince.”[4]Continue Reading Supreme Court Finds Warhol’s Commercial Licensing of “Orange Prince” to Vanity Fair Is Not Fair Use and Infringes Goldsmith’s Famed Rock Photo

On January 25, 2021, President Joe Biden issued an Executive Order entitled “Ensuring the Future is Made in America by All of America’s Workers,” which directs a broad review and strengthening of governmental procurement and financial assistance policies and regulations which require or provide a preference for goods, products or materials produced in the United States.[1]  While US content must be disclosed on automobiles, textile, wool and fur products sold in the US[2] and there is no law which requires a company to disclose the amount of US content or that a product is manufactured in the US, manufacturers and retailers who make claims about the amount of US content in their products must comply with the  “MADE IN USA” Enforcement Policy Statement issued by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”).[3]  The Enforcement Policy Statement applies to all products advertised or sold in the US, except those specifically subject to country-of-origin labeling requirements and “MADE IN USA” claims, express and implied, that appear on products and labelling, advertising and promotional materials and other forms of marketing including digital marketing and social media.[4]  In order to make an unqualified claim that a product is “MADE IN USA”, a manufacturer or marketer should have competent and reliable evidence (“a reasonable basis”) to support a claim that the product is “all or virtually all” made in the US.[5]
Continue Reading Seeking to Stop Deceptive ‘MADE IN USA’ Claims, the FTC Takes Action Against Brandnex

On January 25, 2021, President Joe Biden issued an Executive Order entitled “Ensuring the Future is Made in America by All of America’s Workers,” which directs a broad review and strengthening of governmental procurement and financial assistance policies and regulations which require or provide a preference for goods, products or materials produced in the United States.[1]  While US content must be disclosed on automobiles, textile, wool and fur products sold in the US[2] and there is no law which requires a company to disclose the amount of US content or that a product is manufactured in the US, manufacturers and retailers who make claims about the amount of US content in their products must comply with the  “MADE IN USA” Enforcement Policy Statement issued by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”).[3]  The Enforcement Policy Statement applies to all products advertised or sold in the US, except those specifically subject to country-of-origin labeling requirements and “MADE IN USA” claims, express and implied, that appear on products and labelling, advertising and promotional materials and other forms of marketing including digital marketing and social media.[4]  In order to make an unqualified claim that a product is “MADE IN USA”, a manufacturer or marketer should have competent and reliable evidence (“a reasonable basis”) to support a claim that the product is “all or virtually all” made in the US.[5]
Continue Reading Seeking to Stop Deceptive ‘MADE IN USA’ Claims, the FTC Takes Action Against Brandnex

In April 2018, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) wrote to Florida-based Teami LLC (“Teami”), a Florida-based producer of Teami tea and skincare products, reminding it of the requirement set forth in the FTC’s Endorsement Guides, that any material connections, including compensation, between advertisers and internet end-users need to be disclosed “clearly and conspicuously” to consumers.  The letter noted that endorsers should use unambiguous language and consumers should be able to notice the disclosure easily without having to look for it; and that because consumers viewing posts in their Instagram feeds typically see only the first few lines of a larger post unless they click “more,” endorsers should decide any material connection above the name look.[1] 
Continue Reading FTC Cracks Down On Deceptive Social Media Campaign By Teami LLC

This post originally appeared on the Council of Fashion Designers of America website, CFDA.com.

You’ve worked so hard to get your foot in the door with that prized retailer, striving mightily to please them. They’ve finally supported your line and you just shipped them a big order for Fall 2020. But that same retailer has now filed Chapter 11. What can you do to protect your inventory in the bankruptcy proceeding? Should you continue to do business with the retailer during the bankruptcy? And what can you do to avoid these problems in the future with other retailers? This article will briefly address these questions and provide some basic strategies to help guide the designer/manufacturer in these difficult times.
Continue Reading Protecting Your Inventory and Getting Paid

This post originally appeared on the Council of Fashion Designers of America website, CFDA.com.

Before the COVID-19 outbreak, fashion retail already faced difficult times with numerous bankruptcies, such as Barneys, Sonia Rykiel, Roberto Cavalli and Diesel.  Now with COVID-19, fashion retail confronts a “perfect storm” — the hurricane of the disruption of brick and mortar retail caused by omnichannel retailing and the Nor’easter resulting from the shutdown of all retail stores and lockdown of consumers in the US.  It is anticipated that retail bankruptcy filings will proliferate in the wake of COVID-19 and, as a result, it is important to have a basic understanding of the bankruptcy process and concepts for fashion businesses, including Chapters 11 and 7, critical vendor status, how to file a claim, and what strategies can be used to sell to an entity once it has filed for bankruptcy.
Continue Reading Fashionista’s Guide to Bankruptcy: What Every Designer Needs to Know to be Protected in Times of Economic Uncertainty

This post originally appeared on the Council of Fashion Designers of America website, CFDA.com.

Before the COVID-19 outbreak, fashion retail already faced difficult times with numerous bankruptcies, such as Barneys, Sonia Rykiel, Roberto Cavalli and Diesel.  Now with COVID-19, fashion retail confronts a “perfect storm” — the hurricane of the disruption of brick and mortar retail caused by omnichannel retailing and the Nor’easter resulting from the shutdown of all retail stores and lockdown of consumers in the US.  It is anticipated that retail bankruptcy filings will proliferate in the wake of COVID-19 and, as a result, it is important to have a basic understanding of the bankruptcy process and concepts for fashion businesses, including Chapters 11 and 7, critical vendor status, how to file a claim, and what strategies can be used to sell to an entity once it has filed for bankruptcy.
Continue Reading Fashionista’s Guide to Bankruptcy: What Every Designer Needs to Know to be Protected in Times of Economic Uncertainty

This post originally appeared on the Council of Fashion Designers of America website, CFDA.com.

You’ve worked so hard to get your foot in the door with that prized retailer, striving mightily to please them. They’ve finally supported your line and you just shipped them a big order for Fall 2020. But that same retailer has now filed Chapter 11. What can you do to protect your inventory in the bankruptcy proceeding? Should you continue to do business with the retailer during the bankruptcy? And what can you do to avoid these problems in the future with other retailers? This article will briefly address these questions and provide some basic strategies to help guide the designer/manufacturer in these difficult times.
Continue Reading Protecting Your Inventory and Getting Paid

On February 12, 2020, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) announced that it had voted 5‑0 to approve a proposed Federal Register Notice, seeking comment on whether to make changes to its Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising (“the Endorsement Guides”), which were enacted in 1980 and amended in 2009, as part of a systematic review of all current FTC rules and practices.  The FTC’s Endorsement Guides have evolved over the past forty years from regulating celebrity endorsements and testimonial advertisements to policing social media advertising, including influencer endorsements and native advertising.  The Endorsement Guides have steadfastly required transparency in advertising and that, if there is a connection between an endorser and the maker of a product being advertised or promoted which, if disclosed, might affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement, such connection must be disclosed clearly and conspicuously.  In the proposed notice, the FTC requested comment on a variety of questions, including the following:
Continue Reading After Four Decades, FTC Announces Regulatory Review of The Endorsement Guides: What Does This Portend for Digital Advertisers and Social Media Platforms?

*This article originally appeared in Law360 in December 12.

A recent 2018 report disclosed that almost three-quarters of U.S. millennials and their Gen Z successors follow social media influencers, and the majority say they trust influencers more than their favorite celebrities when it comes to advice about products or brands.

Authenticity and genuinely caring about consumer interests are the most important traits when deciding whether to follow an influencer on social media. With the growth of influencers’ ability to reach and persuade significant portions of the population, their role has come under increasing scrutiny by the Federal Trade Commission.
Continue Reading FTC Disclosure Guide Signals More Influencer Scrutiny