Charitable Fundraising Platforms
Join us as we spotlight select chapters of Venable's popular Advertising Law Tool Kit, which helps marketing teams navigate their organization's legal risk. Click here to download the entire Tool Kit.
Brands operating websites or apps for cause-related marketing and charitable fundraising are increasingly regulated as charitable fundraising platforms under state laws. Historically, regulation focused on "commercial coventurers" conducting "charitable sales promotions."
FTC Forges Ahead in Court Battle on FTC Act's Scope Over Nonprofit Institutions (And Loses)
With much of the administrative state in turmoil, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) appears to be holding steady and continuing to litigate its current cases.
We previously discussed the FTC's lawsuit against Grand Canyon University (GCU) and its president, in particular the court's granting of GCU's motion to dismiss, finding that the FTC could not bring claims against GCU because it was a nonprofit organization and not a "person, partnership, or corporation" within the FTC's jurisdiction.
Lawsuit Alleging Greenwashing Filed against Procter & Gamble for Charmin Toilet Paper
Last month, a putative class action was filed against Procter & Gamble challenging various green advertising claims for its Charmin toilet paper. The complaint brought a variety of state law claims targeting P&G's sustainability claims, including "Keep Forests as Forests," and alleged that the claims were explicitly false and misleading.
New York Court Dismisses Suit Against JBS but Allows Attorney General to File Amended Complaint
Environmental claims are a powerful tool for companies to demonstrate their commitment to sustainability and connect with values-driven consumers. However, these claims are facing increased legal scrutiny, as governments and regulators aim to close the gap between companies' climate pledges and their corporate actions.
The Fifth Circuit Slams the Brakes and Vacates FTC CARS Rule
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) Combatting Auto Retail Scams (CARS) rule. Industry groups had challenged the rule, arguing that:
- The FTC violated Section 18(b) of the FTC Act by failing to issue an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) before promulgating the CARS rule.
- The FTC arbitrarily and capriciously failed to articulate a reasoned basis for the rule.
- The FTC's cost-benefit analysis was arbitrary and capricious.
The decision highlights the Fifth Circuit's hostility to the "Administrative State" and the two different rulemaking schemes under which the FTC operates.