Takes effect in October, finally some good news

    • solarvector@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      Not sure why you’re being down voted. It’s a legit question even if you support the law. Enforcement seems very difficult and other laws and courts make even easier enforcement difficult.

      I still think it’s a very positive direction from the FTC.

      • AtomicTacoSauce@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        3 months ago

        Not sure why you’re being down voted

        I guess Reddit habits never die, eh?

        But, I’d love to see this come to fruition. I just don’t see how enforcement could keep up with the sheer numbers of fake reviews.

      • AtomicTacoSauce@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Um, there are thousands of laws that can be enforced through direct observation of a crime. How do you propose that bots or fake reviews be banned in reality? That’s like saying that I want to ban farts at my house. Ok, great. Saying you want something banned and actually having the means to do so are two completely different things.

      • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Because this isn’t a law like- breaking and entry is a law. It’s won’t be so easy to prove, and it’s a lot easier to tie this up in appeals.

    • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      The rule targets people who write or sell fake reviews. So the FTC could pretend to be a manufacturer soliciting fake reviews, and then go after anyone who offers to sell them.

    • 4am@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      Might just give way to an arms race for realistic fake reviews, but at least this gives teeth to investigators. If they can prove that a company did it, then they have a rule to cite that it’s an offense, instead of the fuck-all we have now.