You Can't Stifle Consumer Reviews: Complying with the Consumer Review Fairness Act
Haynes and Boone, LLP Press
As of March 14, 2017, the recently enacted Consumer Review Fairness Act (the “Act”)1 will prohibit “gag clauses” – contract provisions that prohibit or restrict a consumer's ability to write negative reviews of products and services. While enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and state attorneys general is set to begin on December 14, 2017, businesses should act now to ensure compliance. Starting March 14, it will be unlawful to offer a form contract to customers if it contains a gag clause.
Under the Act, it is illegal for a company to include in a form contract any provision that: (1) prohibits or restricts a consumer from providing reviews; (2) imposes a penalty or fee against a consumer who provides a review; or (3) transfers or requires transfer of the intellectual property in a review from the reviewer to the business being reviewed. As of March 14, 2017, it will be unlawful to offer form contracts with such provisions. If such a provision is offered nonetheless, it will be void.
The Act applies to “form contracts,” which include website terms and conditions. Contracts that have been meaningfully negotiated, however, are not covered by the Act. Further, the Act specifically exempts contracts between employers and employees or independent contractors. Businesses may still prohibit, and website operators may still remove, reviews that: (1) contain confidential or private information; (2) are libelous, defamatory, and/or harassing; (3) are unrelated to the business's products or services; or (4) are clearly false or misleading. On this last point, FTC has taken it upon itself in its Guidance to state that a review with which one disagrees is unlikely to be “clearly false or misleading.”
Starting in December of this year, state attorneys general and the FTC will enforce the Act. FTC enforcement action means that a business violating the Act could be subject to financial penalties and a federal court order. Businesses should therefore act now to ensure compliance by taking the following steps:
1Pub. L. No. 114-258, 130 Stat. 1355.
- Abuse of dominance: Important clarifications by the European Court of Justice
- Law on Blocking Mirror Websites
- Newly Enacted Information Security Regulations
- Law on Security of Critical Information Infrastructure: implications for players of finance, banking, transport, health, telecom and other industries.
Haynes and Boone, LLP Press
- Haynes and Boone Wins Key Ruling for Union Pacific Railroad
- Haynes and Boone Lawyers Field Harvey-Related Questions
- Texas Appellate Bar “Dean” Mike Hatchell Joins Haynes and Boone
WSG Member: Please login to add your comment.