On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Hot Topics in Advertising Law 2017

Released on: Jun. 30, 2017
Running Time: 06:21:18

Updated every year to provide the most cutting-edge information related to the practice of advertising law, this advanced program is led by an all-star faculty of experts who will address the many challenges companies face each day as they develop advertising campaigns. As companies strive to increase market share in a dynamic landscape increasingly dominated by social networks and other new media outlets, legal pitfalls abound. In this program you will hear real-world advice and learn practical tips and strategies you can rely on daily.

You will learn:

  • Learn about theenforcement priorities at the FTC, NAD, and FCC
  • Understand media standards and the acceptability of ad content
  • Explore challenges faced by advertisers regarding privacy and data collection
  • Learn strategies for managing controversial advertising
  • Navigate challenges of real-time advertising
  • Ethics scenarios surrounding claim substantiation

Firm attorneys, in-house counsel, marketing executives, and allied professionals who practice in the fields of advertising, media, communications, trademark, and consumer protection law will benefit from this program.

Lecture Topics [Total time 06:21:18]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.


  • Opening Remarks and Introduction* [00:02:57]
    Tsan Abrahamson, Ashima A. Dayal
  • FTC, NAD, and FCC: Year in Review & Enforcement Priorities [01:21:47]
    Hal Hodes, Christine L. DeLorme, Marc S. Roth
  • Acceptability of Ad Content/Media Standards [00:56:55]
    Gregory A. Brehm, Ashima A. Dayal, Fabio Bertoni, Elyssa Dunleavy
  • Political and Other Controversial Advertising [01:00:29]
    Ashima A. Dayal, Harlan Loeb, Ndidi Oriji, Michael Crawford
  • Issues Involved in Real Time Advertising [01:00:36]
    Tsan Abrahamson, Randi W. Singer, Jane G. Pollack, Laura J. Protzmann
  • Key Issues in Privacy and Data Collection for Advertisers [00:59:51]
    Tsan Abrahamson, Eric Goldman, Seth Blinder, Marc S. Roth
  • Ethics: What Does Claim Substantiation Really Mean to Consumers? [00:58:43]
    Ashima A. Dayal, Zev Parnass, Emily Reisbaum

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:


  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Materials Regarding Claims for Homeopathic Drugs
    Christine L. DeLorme
  • ECM BioFilms, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission, No. 15-4339 (6th Cir. 2017)
    Christine L. DeLorme
  • Letters to Marketers and Influencers Regarding Disclosures
    Christine L. DeLorme
  • National Advertising Division, Press Release: NAD Considers Jurisdictional Issue, Recommends Beech-Nut Discontinue Certain Claims, Finds Certain Claims Supported After Gerber Challenge (New York, NY, April 18, 2017)
    Hal Hodes
  • National Advertising Division, Press Release: NAD Reviews Performance Claims, Endorsements, Reviews for Fit Products ‘Fit Tea;’ Recommends Company Discontinue Challenged Claims (New York, NY, January 17, 2017)
    Hal Hodes
  • National Advertising Division, Press Release: NAD Recommends French’s Food Modify, Discontinue Challenged ‘High-Fructose’ Claims Made in Comparative Context Following Challenge by Heinz (New York, NY, August 29, 2016)
    Hal Hodes
  • Remarks of FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly, ACA International’s Washington Insights Conference (May 4, 2017)
  • 2017 Trends in Marketing Communications Law
  • Leslie Fair, “Influencers, are your #materialconnection #disclosures #clearandconspicuous?,” Federal Trade Commission (April 19, 2017), https://www.ftc.gov/newsevents/blogs/business-blog/2017/04/influencers-are-yourmaterialconnection-disclosures
  • The FTC’s Endorsement Guides: What People Are Asking, Federal Trade Commission (May 2015)
  • Shani O. Hilton, The BuzzFeed News Standards and Ethics Guide (Originally posted on January 30, 2015. Updated on December 9, 2016)
    Gregory A. Brehm
  • Federal Trade Commission, Enforcement Policy Statement on Deceptively Formatted Advertisements
  • The Data-Centric Organization: Transforming for the Next Generation of Audience Marketing, A Winterberry Group White Paper (September 2016)
  • Re-Gramming, Hashtagging, and Like-Gating: Sweepstakes in the New Digital Age, and How New Laws May Actually Improve Your Promotions
    Tsan Abrahamson
  • Cross-Device Tracking: An FTC Staff Report, Federal Trade Commission (January 2017)
  • Davis & Gilbert LLP, Amazon, FTC Withdraw Appeal of Decision Holding Amazon Liable for Billing Parents for Children’s Unauthorized In-App Charges (April 2017)
  • Article 29 Data Protection Working Party: Guidelines on the right to data portability (Adopted on December 13, 2016)
  • Article 29 Data Protection Working Party: Guidelines for identifying a controller or processor’s lead supervisory authority (Adopted on December 13, 2016)
  • Article 29 Data Protection Working Party: Guidelines on Data Protection Officers (‘DPOs’) (Adopted on December 13, 2016)
  • Yael Bame, “Two-thirds of US adults support boycotting brands over politics,” YouGov (March 8, 2017), https://today.yougov.com/news/2017/03/08/two-thirds-USadults-support-boycotting-brands/
  • The Ethics of Claim Substantiation
    Ashima A. Dayal

Presentation Material


  • FTC Year in Review
    Christine L. DeLorme
  • What are ASRC and NAD?
    Hal Hodes
  • Mobile Marketing and FCC Update
    Marc S. Roth
  • Political and Other Controversial Advertising
    Michael Crawford, Ashima A. Dayal, Harlan Loeb, Ndidi Oriji
  • Issues Involved in Real-Time Advertising
    Tsan Abrahamson, Jane G. Pollack, Laura J. Protzmann, Randi W. Singer
  • The Ethics of Claim Substantiation
    Ashima A. Dayal, Hon. Barbara Dortch-Okara, Zev Parnass, Emily Reisbaum
Co-Chair(s)
Tsan Abrahamson ~ Cobalt LLP
Ashima A. Dayal ~ Davis & Gilbert LLP
Speaker(s)
Fabio Bertoni ~ General Counsel, The New Yorker
Seth Blinder ~ Chief Consumer Privacy Officer, Goldman Sachs & Co
Gregory A. Brehm ~ Assistant General Counsel, BuzzFeed, Inc.
Michael Crawford ~ Social Media Strategist, MoveOn.org
Christine L. DeLorme ~ Bureau of Consumer Protection, Division of Advertising Practices, Federal Trade Commission
Elyssa Dunleavy ~ Associate Vice President, Advertising Counsel, L'Oréal USA, Inc.
Eric Goldman ~ Professor of Law and Co-Director, High Tech Law Institute, Santa Clara University School of Law
Hal Hodes ~ Senior Staff Attorney, National Advertising Division, Council of Better Business Bureaus, Inc.
Harlan Loeb ~ Global Practice Chair, Crisis & Reputations Risk Consulting, Edelman
Ndidi Oriji ~ Senior Vice President, Advertising Standards and Practices, NBCUniversal, Inc.
Zev Parnass ~ Vice President, Associate General Counsel, Publicis Groupe
Jane G. Pollack ~ Director and Associate General Counsel, Citigroup Inc.
Laura J. Protzmann ~ Senior Director, Associate General Counsel, KIND
Emily Reisbaum ~ Clarick Gueron Reisbaum LLP
Marc S. Roth ~ Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Randi W. Singer ~ Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-traditional” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of non-traditional programs per reporting period.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 3 on-demand credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “A/V” credit. Attorneys are limited to 22.5 credits of A/V programs per reporting period.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as “QAS Self-Study” credit. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

 

Related Items

Live Programs  Live Programs

Advertising Law Institute 2018 (San Francisco, CA) Oct. 16 - 17, 2018
Advertising Law Institute 2018 (Chicago, IL) Sep. 13 - 14, 2018
Hot Topics in Advertising Law 2018 (New York, NY) Jun. 26, 2018

On-Demand  On-Demand Programs

Advertising Law Institute 2017 Oct. 20, 2017

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

Advertising Law Institute 2018  
Hot Topics in Advertising Law 2018  
Advertising Law Institute 2017 Holly A Grochmal, Pandora Media, Inc.
Robert H Newman, Winston & Strawn LLP
 
Hot Topics in Advertising Law 2017 Ashima A Dayal, Davis & Gilbert LLP
Tsan Abrahamson, Cobalt LLP
 
Advertising Law Institute 2016 Holly A Grochmal, Pandora Media, Inc.
Liisa M Thomas, Winston & Strawn LLP
 
Share
Email
“Great seminar. Great content.”
Dwayne Watts, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP

“These were excellent programs. All great speakers.”
Susan McGreevy, Stinson Leonard Street

“Very helpful and informative. Thank you!”
2016 Attendee


  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • GooglePlus
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2017 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2017 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.