30

Given that this is a UK based company, the most applicable Act would be the Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971 A person who, not having reasonable cause to believe there is a right to payment, in the course of any trade or business makes a demand for payment, or asserts a present or prospective right to payment, for what he knows are ...


16

In the USA, when a creditor tries to collect a debt, the presumed-debtor may demand proof that they actually owe the debt, and that the creditor holds the debt. This can be satisfied by signed contracts, which in the case you describe, would not exist. Detailed, complete phone recordings may also establish proof of the debt. But again, in the situation ...


7

It isn't obvious that one must be certified to advertise your product as "Kobe Beef" in the United States. The designation "Kobe Beef", in theory, is supposed to operate a lot like a trademark, but it is a geographic designation that presumably belongs to officials from the geographic area, rather than a true trademark that is owned by a private individual ...


6

What aspects of this operation are illegal? As described, none of it is legal, it’s a scam. The crime is fraud. Could any of these verbal agreements be enforceable? No.


6

The jurisdiction does matter. Generally, at the national level, the Federal Trade Commission prohibits deceptive advertising. From the FTC's website, "Advertising FAQ's: A Guide for Small Business:" When can a company advertise a "going out of business sale"? The short answer is: only when a store is going out of business. It would be deceptive to ...


5

Under the law of common law contracts, posting a price is an invitation to treat and is not binding. However, in many jurisdictions, there may be (probably is) statutory consumer protection law that make this practice illegal. Whether this means the business must honor the price or merely makes them liable to prosecution and fines depends on the specific ...


5

If the sticker is not easily removable, it would likely fall under defacement of the mail which is illegal according to 18 U.S. Code § 1705 - Destruction of letter boxes or mail: Whoever willfully or maliciously injures, tears down or destroys any letter box or other receptacle intended or used for the receipt or delivery of mail on any mail route, or ...


4

It is capitalized because the word NEXIUM has a conspicuous definition. In other words, they're using it in the specific way they have defined it to mean. This is to differentiate it from any other meaning it may have in some other context. Obviously with NEXIUM, it's a word they just made up and it's very unlikely that it could ever be confused with ...


4

The formation of a contract occurs at the point where an offer is made and accepted by a person to whom it was made. The acceptance must be in reliance of the offer - if you don’t know the offer has been made you cannot accept it because you lack the intent to create a legal obligation. The reward for the lost dog is the textbook example. A real example is ...


4

I don't know too much about Mauritian contract law, but I'd assume you'd have to identify some legal obligation that the school breached. Here, the school offered you a full ride in its electrical engineering program, and has delivered on its promise. The fact that you don't like the program anymore probably doesn't make then liable for anything. In terms ...


4

This is pretty solid fair use territory. The court will consider how much you copied and whether you needed to, but I don't think they'd think you crossed the line with these facts. Even if they did, that's just one of four factors, and the others generally work in your favor. For a similar case in a New Hampshire governor's race, check out Keep Thomson ...


4

Why does a word like “homemade” not constitute false advertising? It is not amount to false advertising when its mention in the advertisement matches the common, ordinary usage of the term. In that case, the advertisement does not deceive or mislead the customers. The law only sanctions practices that are deceptive, not those which are substantially ...


4

Under U.S. law, this is only actionable is you make this statement knowing that it would not "support the continued creation of X" and that instead, you had already completely abandoned that product and you were, for example, planning to change lines of work and become a lumberjack instead. Even in that case, common law fraud is hard to show, because you ...


4

How Are Liability And Insurance Matters Usually Disclosed? Normally, in a car sharing arrangement, you must establish a membership or account with the car sharing firm that includes all of the terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties (at least by reference to a document that you acknowledge that you have had an opportunity to read), often ...


3

It depends on where exactly in the world you are. In the United Kingdom, you cannot force the shop to trade at the advertised price. They can claim that they made a mistake and refuse. However, they are not allowed to use incorrect pricing to lure customers in. After you try to buy and they refuse because of a mistake, they need to fix that mistake and ...


3

No (in almost all U.S. jurisdictions). Truth or falsity is evaluated when a statement is originally made and doesn't have to remain true forever. Also, generally the law treats an ad like that as an invitation for you to make any offer to them, not a binding offer to form a contract that is held open indefinitely. So you can't force them into a contract ...


3

Due to competition/antitrust laws it can be illegal, more so if the search engine is dominant in the market. This has actually been realized in the EU where they fined Google €2.42 billion for abusing their market dominance and favouring their own Google Shopping service in search results. For further information, that fine has been specifically addressed ...


3

The picture shown is not fraudulent or problematic. Fraud involves using a false representation (or concealing a fact) in order to obtain a result that would not have been possible to secure without the misstatement or concealment. No one is using the photograph of the exterior of a passport (which is identical for all U.S. passports) to obtain any ...


3

There is no real answer to that question at this point. If on filed such a suit, it would probably be under a negligence theory. You would sue: Forbes, because they're the website the user visited? The ad network that provided a vector for infection and didn't properly check their content? The makers of the ad, because they made the ad with ...


3

It's not the manufacturers who are wrong. Your definitions of KB, MB, and GB are incorrect. See, for example, NIST. The numbers they are using are not "rounded down," they are the proper standardized definitions of those terms. 1024 bytes is properly termed a kibibyte (or KiB), not a kilobyte. 1024 kibibytes is a mebibyte, MiB. 1024 mebibytes is a gibibyte, ...


3

Assuming everything exactly as in the question, that is probably deceptive advertising. But ads for ISP services, much less contracts for them, tend to be full of exceptions and details, and he exact wording of those will matter here. If there was "fine print" that said the service will often be at 3 Mb/s, that may be enough to make this legal. Also, that ...


3

According to this site in the UK apparently there are laws against calling something free if it was part of the entire package before or if was added later and the price went up Example of the latter: LG sold a TV. They then added a sound bar, increased the price and listed the TV as TV for $XXX + free sound bar. They ran afoul of the regulations Also ...


3

Does a situation like this constitute breach of contract and/or a violation of advertising laws? No. There is not enough information that would lead to a finding of either. It is unclear how customers would be allegedly affected (if at all) by the release of a product at a different store, let alone where the goods or services at issue are digital and ...


2

The "right of publicity" or "personality rights" is what's relevant. How you might pursue this depends on where you live. In Washington, RCW 63.30 forbids such action – see RCW 63.60.050 Any person who uses or authorizes the use of a living or deceased individual's or personality's name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, on or in goods, ...


2

The U.S. FTC gave extensive guidance on this subject in March 2013. (You may have noticed shortly thereafter that conspicuous disclosures of free samples and compensation started popping up in reviews and posts around the web.) The FTC's FAQ covers this question in such detail I would just encourage people to visit it directly. However, as is the custom ...


2

Australia The relevant legislation is the Australian Consumer Law (ACL): The ACL is administered by the ACCC and state and territory consumer protection agencies and is enforced by all Australian courts and tribunals, including the courts and tribunals of the States and Territories. The protections in the ACL are generally reflected in similar ...


2

Making and selling snake oil are okay, the problem arises with advertising it. The specific problem could be making deceptive claims, which would run afoul of all sorts of regulations. We can start with the quote alleged in the article, that purportedly Goop said: Human bodies operate at an ideal energetic frequency, but everyday stresses and anxiety ...


2

Outside of monopoly. anti-trust and anti-competition laws, Google is not bound by law or regulation to rank search results in any way other than by their own prerogative. Google (and Yahoo and DuckDuckGo and other search engines) are private businesses and thus can present their search results any way they choose. They can show any search results they want ...


2

Lying is not generally illegal, but deceptive advertising is. The exact extent depends on jurisdiction. In Washington, RCW 9.04.010 states Any person...who, with intent to sell ...merchandise...place[s] before the public ... an advertisement ... which ... contains any[thing] which is untrue, deceptive or misleading, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. ...


2

You are using their trademarks without permission, and can be sued to have them removed. In practice there is probably a low chance of them bringing you to court (since your channel probably has very little impact to them) but as your channel grows bigger it is exposing itself to youtube violation strikes and will likely be struck down after a while.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible