• Home
  • RSS Feeds
  • Blog Archives
Subscribe to Disputing
Book an ADR Service
Call Karl Bayer
Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog - Mediator, Arbitrator, Court Master & Technical Advisor
About Karl  |  Book an ADR Service  |  Contact Karl   (214) 891-4505

Menu 
  • home
  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Court Neutrals
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity
    • E-discovery
  • Court Decisions
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • Fifth Circuit
    • Third Court of Appeals
    • U.S. Supreme Court
  • More
    • Legislation
      • Texas
      • United States
    • Healthcare
    • Guest Posts
      • John DeGroote
      • John C. Fleming
      • Rick Freeman
      • Professor Peter Friedman
      • Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
      • James M. Gaitis
      • Laura A. Kaster
      • Professor John Lande
      • Philip J. Loree, Jr.
      • Michael McIlwrath
      • F. Peter Phillips
      • Professor Alan Scott Rau
      • Professor Thomas J. Stipanowich
      • Professor S.I. Strong
      • Richard Webb
      • Glen M. Wilkerson
    • International arbitration
    • Regulation
    • Sports and Entertainment


FTC Files First Case Challenging Fake Incentivized Product Reviews

0
by Nate Legum

Thursday, May 02, 2019


Tweet

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has successfully brought its first case challenging fake paid product reviews, a banned practice called incentivized reviews, on an independent retail website. In the case, the FTC asserted Brooklyn-based defendants paid numerous third parties to create and post positive Amazon reviews of their product in exchange for free products or payments without disclosure since 2014. Although Amazon has attempted to stem fake reviews on its site before, this is the first time the United States government has gotten involved. A proposed court order settling the FTC’s complaint against the defendants levied a deferred $12.8 million fine against the Brooklyn company and held it must back up future claims with reliable scientific data. The settlement also ordered the defendants to refrain from making future misrepresentations regarding its endorsements.

Fake product reviews are big business in the ultra-competitive Amazon marketplace. According to one e-commerce metrics firm, Amazon hosts 1.8 million vendors and sellers who offer nearly 600 million items that generate approximately 9.6 million new product reviews every month. In addition, around 82 percent of American adults check online reviews before purchasing items and they are often more swayed by the simple star rating than the actual review. Finally, the top three products listed typically generate around 64 percent of the purchaser clicks.

This means a high rating can be the difference between being a best seller on Amazon and getting lost in the crowd. Items are ranked by A9, Amazon’s search engine algorithm, which automatically determines a product’s spot on the website through a variety of factors, including product reviews. Despite the importance of trustworthy online reviews, a recent Fakespot study determined nearly one-third of Amazon product reviews are unreliable and over half of reviews on Walmart.com are inauthentic or unreliable.

While fake product reviews have been a problem since Amazon’s inception, the issue appears to have intensified in 2015 when Amazon started to seriously woo China-based sellers. That decision led to a flood of Chinese products, with sales from China-based merchants doubling that year. These merchants often sell counterfeit products at a sharp discount. In addition, many Chinese sellers try to game the system by using incentivized reviews or other similar methods to increase their ranking and make themselves appear legitimate. This change has made it harder for other Amazon sellers and lead many to take shortcuts in order to sell their own products.

The prevalence of this problem has led to the creation of websites whose sole purpose is determining whether an online product review is fake or legitimate. Many retailers such as Amazon have also taken steps to reduce the number of fake reviews posted on their sites, including suing thousands of merchants as well as developing technologies designed to identify fake reviews. Nevertheless, the problem has only continued to worsen.

It is encouraging to see the FTC enter the fray and try to stop the rise of fake incentivized product reviews. Although the FTC successfully brought charges against an American company in this case, it is unclear whether it could bring charges directly against Chinese companies that utilize fake paid product reviews in the future.

Photo by: Christian Wiediger on Unsplash

Related Posts

  • International Commercial Courts in the United States and Australia: Possible, Probable, Preferable?International Commercial Courts in the United States and Australia: Possible, Probable, Preferable?
  • CMS Issues Final Rule Allowing Pre-Dispute Nursing Home Arbitration AgreementsCMS Issues Final Rule Allowing Pre-Dispute Nursing Home Arbitration Agreements
  • SCOTUS Holds Class Arbitration Must be Explicitly Provided for in AgreementSCOTUS Holds Class Arbitration Must be Explicitly Provided for in Agreement
  • Expanding Access to Remedies Through E-Court InitiativesExpanding Access to Remedies Through E-Court Initiatives
  • Past As Prologue: Arbitration as an Early Common Law CourtPast As Prologue: Arbitration as an Early Common Law Court
  • Pew Charitable Trusts Calls for Standardization of US Court ODR ProgramsPew Charitable Trusts Calls for Standardization of US Court ODR Programs

Like this article? Share it!


  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
    LinkedIn

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
    X

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    Facebook

  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
    Pinterest

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
    Email
About Nate Legum

Nate Legum is a J.D. candidate at the University of Texas School of Law with a focus on intellectual property. Nate earned a B.S. degree in Computer Science at the University of Florida. He has served as a foreign clerk for Justice Barak-Erez of the Supreme Court of Israel and as an intern for Judge Powell of the 17th Judicial Circuit Court of Florida. You may email Nate at nate@legum.us.

Legal Research

Legal Research

Connect with Disputing

Visit Us On LinkedinCheck Our Feed

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

Recent Posts

We're Back!!!!
Feb 24, 2025
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
May 28, 2024
Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements: The Twenty-First Century Arbitration Battleground and Implications for the EU Countries
Nov 27, 2023

Featured Posts

Tips on Taking Good Remote Depositions From a Veteran Court Reporter

Online Mediation May Allow Restorative Justice to Continue During COVID-19

Remote Arbitration Best Practices: Witness Examination

Search

Legal Research

Legal Research


© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy