nike and free speach

[akforme]

Does anyone have any details on there court case that allowed them to lie in advertising? I'm debating somebody who is using this as an example that corporations have the right to be fraudulent.

I've been searching the web but I've not seen anything that tells a lot of details about it. Does anyone have any input or links for this?

[Elwar]

I've been thinking about that as well. I don't think a company should be able to imply that their product can do anything beyond what it can actually do.

Even the implication that drinking something will make you happy, or wearing something will make you attractive to the opposite sex.

Capitalism works best without fraud.

[slothman]

That sounds good except who is to decide what is an implication?
Of course preventing fraud is always good but saying something like a beer will make you sexy would have to be determined by the gov't and therefore would be bad.

[Krugerrand]

That sounds good except who is to decide what is an implication?
Of course preventing fraud is always good but saying something like a beer will make you sexy would have to be determined by the gov't and therefore would be bad.

You mean it's not the beer that makes me sexy?:eek::D

[dean.engelhardt]

Does anyone have any details on there court case that allowed them to lie in advertising? I'm debating somebody who is using this as an example that corporations have the right to be fraudulent.

I've been searching the web but I've not seen anything that tells a lot of details about it. Does anyone have any input or links for this?

GM was allowed to lie on their commercial.

[Elwar]

That sounds good except who is to decide what is an implication?
Of course preventing fraud is always good but saying something like a beer will make you sexy would have to be determined by the gov't and therefore would be bad.

Judges tend to be the ones to make the decisions when it comes to fraud.

I'm not one for suing, but people should sue companies who make it appear that their product will do something that it won't.

Sure, most people will realize that the commercial telling you that Hershey's "put a smile on your face" won't literally put a smile on your face. But it's being said. If you eat a Hershey's bar and don't get a smile on your face, you should be able to sue and win.

So many companies make their money solely on perception and not on substance which denigrates the free market process by adding a smidge of fraud "all in good fun". A company should be able to create a product and present its usefulness and be rewarded equally for the benefit provided. That's capitalism at its best.

[Krugerrand]

^^^ That put a smile on my face!