5-Star Enforcement and the Increasing Rules

Does your organization promote to shoppers or companies that may go away opinions or price your merchandise? Whether or not your clients can go away opinions in your web site or one other public-facing assessment platform, firms ought to concentrate on new developments within the shopper assessment enforcement house which will influence the way you publicize and conduct your product ranking and assessment system.  In case you are not conscious of the increasing shopper assessment rules, it might price your organization tens of millions and even land you in jail.


Part 5 of the Federal Commerce Fee (FTC) Act (the Act) prohibits unfair and misleading acts and practices. Particularly, because the Act pertains to buyer opinions: unfavorable buyer opinions and scores can’t be suppressed or hidden; any incentives for opinions should be disclosed; materials connections between a reviewer and the reviewed product should be disclosed; and assessment gating is prohibited. The FTC has heightened its concentrate on shopper opinions as of late and proposed revisions to the Endorsement Guides for advertisers that will tighten enforcement towards posting false constructive opinions or manipulating shopper notion by suppressing unfavorable opinions, amongst different issues. The proposed guideline revisions would state that “in procuring, suppressing, boosting, organizing, or enhancing shopper opinions of their merchandise, advertisers mustn’t take actions which have the impact of distorting or in any other case misrepresenting what shoppers consider their merchandise.” See Federal Register, Guides In regards to the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Promoting, Part IV (C) (July 26, 2022), https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/07/26/2022-12327/guides-concerning-the-use-of-endorsements-and-testimonials-in-advertising. Along with broadening its Endorsement Guides, the FTC has already demonstrated a major enhance in shopper assessment enforcement—together with pursuing elevated penalties and new priorities like assessment hijacking.


In February 2023, Hadis Nuhanovic, a service provider marketing consultant, was sentenced to twenty months in jail for collaborating in a worldwide scheme through which he bribed staff of a expertise platform to take away unfavorable on-line opinions on his shoppers’ merchandise and reinstate suspended accounts, amongst different unlawful actions similar to stealing delicate firm info associated to product-review rankings and focusing on his shoppers’ opponents on the platform. Nuhanovic, along with a co-defendant, reached out to platform staff in India and bribed them to acquire unfair benefits for his personal enterprise’ acquire. For instance, Nuhanovic admitted that he paid a platform worker to take away unfavorable opinions and additional admitted that he operated a number of sham accounts—created utilizing false info—to buy merchandise from retailers and submit unfavorable opinions about them, with the intention of deceiving shoppers and harming the focused accounts. Moreover, Nuhanovic used his sham accounts to depart constructive opinions for his most well-liked accounts, additional deceiving shoppers and bettering the position of sure favored merchandise in searches.

Along with the assessment bribes, Nuhanovic was investigated for different associated crimes to which he in the end pled responsible. He was sentenced to 3 years of supervised launch on prime of the 20 months in jail and compelled to forfeit $100,000 and pay $160,000 in unreported taxes.


“Overview hijacking” happens when an organization—in promoting its services or products—steals or repurposes opinions of one other services or products it presents. Overview hijacking constitutes false promoting and might happen when an organization merges its new merchandise with totally different, older however extra established merchandise that have already got scores, opinions or badges on an internet site.

In its first enforcement motion focusing on buyer assessment hijacking, on February 16, 2023, the FTC obtained a consent settlement with The Bountiful Firm (Bountiful) for “manipulating product pages and deceiving shoppers” that included a $600,000 fee for shopper financial aid. As alleged by the FTC, Bountiful abused a characteristic, which allowed the corporate to trick shoppers into believing that its newly launched merchandise had extra scores and opinions, increased common scores, and “#1 Finest Vendor” badges. Some platforms have a characteristic that enables distributors to put new merchandise on the identical product element web page as older variations with the whole scores, common star ranking and opinions for all merchandise within the variation relationship; Bountiful, nonetheless, allegedly took benefit of that characteristic to promote its complement merchandise with totally different formulations to spice up visibility and enhance gross sales.

The FTC views this sort of assessment hijacking as clearly misleading and unfair to shoppers and thus, has heightened its concentrate on firms who use this apply to spice up new merchandise’ scores and opinions.


The FTC and US Division of Justice’s broad enforcement signifies the companies’ pattern towards pushing the boundaries on holding firms accountable for deceiving shoppers. Enforcement actions like Nuhanovic might sign a brand new legal strategy by the companies to carry firms and people accountable for shopper deception, notably because it pertains to buyer opinions.

In response to Nuhanovic, some platforms have indicated they’ve techniques in place and groups organized to detect, examine and cease suspicious or criminality and maintain dangerous actors accountable. Firms with comparable product assessment or ranking techniques ought to arrange detection techniques and stay vigilant of makes an attempt each internally and externally to govern buyer notion or be ready to face the results.