直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

INCONTESTABLE® Blog

ESRP Rebukes Yoga Company for Stretching the Truth About Influencers

August 13, 2019

Authored and Edited by Elyse McNamara; Margaret A. Esquenet

Yogis are causing Instagram envy worldwide—women and men executing advanced yoga poses against backdrops of beautiful rock formations, sunsets, and beaches, all while wearing high-end yoga apparel.  Often these enviable posts are the result of spontaneous content creation, but occasionally they are the result of a compensation agreement between the Instagrammer and an advertiser.  As the use of influencer advertising has grown on social media there has simultaneously been a push to enforce standards to ensure that consumers are not misled into believing that paid-for content is spontaneous.  

Under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the FTC has authority to safeguard truth in advertising.  And a core truth-in-advertising principle is that endorsements must be honest and not misleading.  So, to protect this principle in the age of online and social media advertising, the FTC created Endorsement Guides.  The Guides state that when a material connection exists between an advertiser and an endorser, it must be disclosed clearly and conspicuously to the consumer.  Also, they provide that a material connection exists when there is some form of consideration, whether it be monetary or merchandise, provided to the endorser from the advertiser.

Guided by these standards, the Electronic Retailing Self-Regulation Program (“ERSP”), an investigative unit, reviews direct-to-consumer advertisements for deceptiveness.  Last year, ERSP opened an inquiry into Alo, LLC (“Alo Yoga”), a yoga apparel and accessory retailer, after an initial review revealed numerous concerning Instagram posts.  ERSP identified around 60 personal Instagram accounts, some with over 1.5 million followers, that it surmised had a material connection to Alo Yoga that the accounts failed to disclose.  Alo Yoga then confirmed that many of the flagged accounts were provided monetary compensation and/or free merchandise.  Additionally, ERSP found that on several occasions Alo Yoga had reposted the non-compliant posts to its own Instagram page.

Based on these findings, ERSP made several recommendations to Alo Yoga that caused it to rework its endorsement advertising policies and procedures.  Most importantly, it created “Alo Yoga Ambassador Program Guidelines,” reflecting the standards in the FTC Guides.  And it contacted its ambassadors to require them to revise their non-compliant posts to include adequate disclosures and to include proper disclosures in all future posts.  Also, Alo Yoga promised to refrain from reposting non-compliant posts in the future.  In a subsequent report, however, ERSP concluded that these modifications were not sufficient and provided further recommendations.

In preparing its report, ERSP reviewed the amended ambassador posts to determine whether they met the required clear-and-conspicuous standard.  ERSP indicated that including #ad or #sponsored in a post could satisfy that standard—but not if placed inconspicuously.  Rather, the disclosure must be prominent and require no searching by the consumer.  However, ERSP noted that the majority of disclosures included in the ambassador posts were below the “more” line (meaning that consumers would not see the disclosure when scrolling through Instagram unless they requested to see more) and/or were buried in the middle or end of a long list of hashtags.  Therefore, it concluded, the posts’ disclosures were inadequate.

In the end, ERSP recommended that Alo Yoga ambassadors’ current posts be amended to include adequate (clear and conspicuous) disclosures.  Also, ERSP reiterated that the FTC Guides put the responsibility on the advertisers, not the endorsers, to ensure that endorsements are compliant.  Therefore, Alo Yoga was charged with continually monitoring its ambassadors’ posts and addressing issues with individual ambassadors when it discovers non-compliant posts. 

The case is ALO, LLC (Alo Yoga), Report #429, ERSP Case Reports (June 2019).

Tags

false advertising, Federal Trade Commission (FTC), influencers

Related Practices

Trademark and Brand Management

Related Offices

Washington, DC

Copyright © 2019 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. 


DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. 
Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.

Related Insights

At the PTAB Blog

Before the Holding, the Message: Director Squires Uses Magnolia Medical to Outline PTAB Discretionary Denial Policy Changes

May 20, 2026

Conference

19th Annual Forum on Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation in Europe

May 19-20, 2026

Amsterdam

Webinar

Changes at the PTAB from Settled Expectations to Real Parties in Interest to Director Involvement

May 18, 2026

Webinar

Seminar

IP Strategy at the Crossroads: Technology, Enforcement, and Contracts

May 15, 2026

Taipei

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Affirms § 102(b) Invalidity; Source Code Commands Are Not Hearsay

May 14, 2026

Webinar

Implementation of Long-Arm Jurisdiction by the UPC Court and German National Courts: Strategic Considerations and Practical Implications

May 12, 2026

Webinar

Panel Discussion

Google for Startups CEO Event

May 11, 2026

Tel Aviv

Workshop

Protecting Innovation in the Life Sciences: Updates and Key Trends in Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology IP Law

May 7, 2026

Cambridge

Panel Discussion

Global Patent Strategies & Litigation: An Exclusive Off-the-Record Conversation with Experienced In-House Leaders

May 5, 2026

London

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP