Sweepstakes and Contests: Drafting Rules
and Procedures to Avoid Liability and LossStatutory and Regulatory Compliance; Litigation
Today’s faculty features:
1pm Eastern | 12pm Central | 11am Mountain | 10am Pacific
The audio portion of the conference may be accessed via the telephone or by using your computer's
speakers. Please refer to the instructions emailed to registrants for additional information. If you
have any questions, please contact Customer Service at 1-800-926-7926 ext. 1.
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 2019
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A
Barry M. Benjamin, Partner, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, New York
Brandon J. Huffman, Founder, Odin Law & Media, Raleigh, N.C.
Tips for Optimal Quality
Sound Quality
If you are listening via your computer speakers, please note that the quality
of your sound will vary depending on the speed and quality of your internet
connection.
If the sound quality is not satisfactory, you may listen via the phone: dial
1-877-447-0294 and enter your Conference ID and PIN when prompted.
Otherwise, please send us a chat or e-mail [email protected] immediately
so we can address the problem.
If you dialed in and have any difficulties during the call, press *0 for assistance.
Viewing Quality
To maximize your screen, press the ‘Full Screen’ symbol located on the bottom
right of the slides. To exit full screen, press the Esc button.
FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY
Continuing Education Credits
In order for us to process your continuing education credit, you must confirm your
participation in this webinar by completing and submitting the Attendance
Affirmation/Evaluation after the webinar.
A link to the Attendance Affirmation/Evaluation will be in the thank you email
that you will receive immediately following the program.
For additional information about continuing education, call us at 1-800-926-7926
ext. 2.
FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY
Program Materials
If you have not printed the conference materials for this program, please
complete the following steps:
• Click on the link to the PDF of the slides for today’s program, which is located
to the right of the slides, just above the Q&A box.
• The PDF will open a separate tab/window. Print the slides by clicking on the
printer icon.
FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY
Sweepstakes and Contests: Drafting Rules and Procedures to Avoid Liability and Loss
2019 Strafford Webinars
Kilpatrick Townsend
Barry M. Benjamin
Odin Law & Media
Brandon J. Huffman
▪ Games of chance → Gambling, Lotteries
▪ Gambling / Lotteries are State law based regulations.
Feds generally hands off, but do regulate the marketplace.
▪ Only States can:
Run legally authorized lotteries
Permit / regulate gambling
Via the state constitution which prohibits the sin of gambling
▪ States also regulate consumer games of chance via prize and gift disclosure statutes / regulations.
▪ Most of what we do is try to bottom line a crazy quilt of Federal and 50 state laws and regulations
7
7
▪ Sweepstakes – a game of chance, random draw, prizes awarded via random chance
▪ Skill Contest – prizes awarded via evaluated skill of entrants
▪ Fundraising lingo – bingo, raffles, casino night, all illegal - conducted for charitable purposes, and permitted only in absence of enforcement
Language you need to know:
8
▪ 1954 – Sup. Ct. decides FCC v. ABC (watch and win ok)
▪ Federal: 1999 - Deceptive Mail Prevention and Enforcement Act (39 U.S.C. § 3001(a) et seq.)
▪ Federal: US Postal Service laws and regulations
▪ State Lottery laws, consumer protection, and prize and gift statutes
▪ State, e.g.: Colorado – Col. Res. Stat. §§ 6-1-303, 6-1-801, et seq.
▪ State, e.g.: Texas – Tex. Bus. & Comm. Code Ann. §§ 40.001, et seq.
In addition, a number of governmental agencies are tasked with oversight of this area:
Fed: (1) United States Postal Service
▪ (2) Federal Trade Commission
▪ (3) Federal Communication Commission
▪ (4) Department of Justice
State: (1) State Attorneys General
▪ (2) Local District Attorneys
9
▪ For a private company to run a legal sweepstakes:
▪ Do not violate the Lottery or Gambling laws
▪ Lottery = 3 elements
1. Prize
2. Chance
3. Consideration
▪ To be legal, a promotion must eliminate one of these three elements
Sweepstakes - Construction
1010
• Any “Games of Chance”
– Sweepstakes or Random Drawing
– In-pack game
– Under the cap game
– Pre-selected winning number
– Scratch and win
• Prize = Something of Tangible Value
– Cash, etc. (what about “loot boxes”?)
– NOT Bragging rights or publicity
Sweepstakes – Construction (Cont’d)
1111
▪ Chance = Random prize award• Not skill based prize distribution
• Not a price discount that everyone gets
▪ Examples• Random Drawing
• Random seeding of winning game cards
• Random pre-selected winning numbers
Sweepstakes – Construction (Cont’d)
1212
• “Consideration” – Two types
– Monetary Consideration
– Non-Monetary Consideration
• Examples of Monetary Consideration:
– Entry fee
– Product purchase
• e.g. – Require image of product in picture to be uploaded
Sweepstakes – Construction (Cont’d)
1313
Non-Monetary Consideration – both of: (a) Substantial time or effort by the consumer, that
(b) benefits the Sponsor in some direct way
– Note – no promotion has been challenged on non-
monetary consideration grounds in the past 20 years
• Travel to a location
• Disclosure of sensitive proprietary information
• Disclosure of credit card information or social security number
• Requiring entrants to receive text messages as a condition of
entry may constitute consideration
Sweepstakes – Construction (Cont’d)
1414
▪How to Eliminate the element of Consideration• Provide at least one complete FREE method of entry
• Other methods of entry, consideration OK (e.g. buy candy bar OR send in a 3x5 card for free game piece)
Sweepstakes – Construction (Cont’d)
1515
Example:
– Sponsor runs athletic competition, too many applicants
– Sponsor says “Pay $50 for chance to run in race, we
will randomly select entrants to run.” (and if you don’t
get to run in the race, you don’t get your money back)
Sweepstakes – Construction (Cont’d)
1616
▪ May 13, 2015: World Triathlon Corporation (Ironman) Forfeits
More Than $2.7 Million in Lottery Proceeds
▪ DOJ/FBI settlement
▪ Ironman says it has run entry into the competition in
a "substantially similar manner since 1983”
▪ Thousands of athletes purchased multiple entries.
Sweepstakes – Construction (Cont’d)
1717
▪ Post a product review, receive an entry to win
▪ Post a picture with your child eating our chicken nuggets, receive
entry to win
▪ Play free game to build up points; use points to either receive
merchandise or enter to win
“Hidden” Consideration Issues
1818
1. Official rules
2. Abbreviated rules
3. Registration in FL, NY, RI if nec’y
i. Registration, surety bond, fees
ii. After complete: Winners list
4. Winner Notification
5. Winner Declaration (includes release of liability)
6. 1099-Misc if prize over $600 (need ssn)
Documentation
1919
• “Official Rules”
• The terms or official rules of a promotion
are a contract with the consumer
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules
2020
• After Launch – Rules are binding
• Why? Consumer reliance
• Just like a contract – one side cannot unilaterally
change the terms
• Do not say: “Sponsor reserves the right to
change the terms of these rules at any time for
any reason”
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
2121
Carefully draft rules at the outset
Everything is in your favor before launch –
FORESIGHT
CAREFULLY DRAFT AHEAD OF TIME
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
2222
The Big Fundamental
“No purchase necessary”
Start and End DatesStart Date = entry begins
End Date = entry ends
End Date is NOT:
When winner selected; When winner contacted; When prize awarded; any other time
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
2323
All entry methods
– Pay entry (look inside wrapper!)
– AMOE = “Alternate Method of Entry”
– Send a 3x5 card to [ADDRESS] or a stamped, self
addressed envelope
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
2424
Be complete
• If necessary, state what IS NOT included
e.g. trips, automobiles, transportation to event
Be accurate
• Don’t exaggerate
• Don’t be funny – people don’t “get it”
• (Toyota Contest)
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
2525
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
2626
Prize Value
– Approximate Retail Value (ARV)
– Measured by value to CONSUMER, not cost to
Sponsor
– Do not exaggerate value –
• False advertising
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
2727
DISASTER STRIKES!
Ingrate - “I’ll take the difference in cash”• Trip prize – ARV stated as $10,000.
• Winner receives airplane tickets, hotel bill, tickets to event, etc., and
will see actual cost.
• Actual cost turns out to be $5,000
• Practical Tip = Let the prize sell the promotion, not the ARV
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
2828
• Sponsor - issue 1099 tax form for prizes over $600
– Need winner’s social security number
• Non-cash prizes – problematic
– Win a Porsche!
– Non-cash prize - cash substitution NEED NOT equal ARV
• Odds of Winning statement required
– Game piece games - “1:___”
– Random drawing – “Odds of winning depend on the number of eligible
entries received”
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
2929
Quick Quiz:
Is it Ok to extend the end date?
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
3030
DISASTER STRIKES!
• Extending the End Date – DON’T DO IT
• It is going so well, we want to extend it
• It is going so poorly, we want to extend it
• Why?
– Reduces the odds of winning for the consumer
– Changes the official rules
• Practical Tip: Run a second promotion similar to the first, with
new/different prizes
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
3131
Quick Quiz:
12 year old wins ESPN NCAA March Madness bracket contest. Ok?
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
3232
DISASTER STRIKES!
– Apr. 8, 2015: ESPN Creates Own PR Disaster by Refusing to Pay 6th
Grader for NCAA Pool Victory
– 12 yr old Sam Holtz of Illinois wins $20,000 in ESPN bracket challenge.
– Problem: Rules say 18 and over only.
– Practical Tip: Adhere to the official rules.
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
3333
• Abbreviated Rules
– Space constraints known
– Include “Material Terms”
• “No purchase necessary”
• End date
• Eligibility limitations (usu. “50 US/DC”)
• Where the heck are the full rules? (URL)
• Sponsor’s name
Sweepstakes – Drafting Official Rules (Cont’d)
3434
• Florida and New York
– Over $5,000, with Bond
– Advance filing deadlines:
• Florida – 7 days – enforced vigorously
• New York – 30 days – not enforced vigorously
• Rhode Island
– Retail promotions only
– Over $500, no Bond, no advance filing
– Not vigorously enforced
Sweepstakes – Registration and Bonding
3535
Skill Contests
3636
▪Distinguish from Sweepstakes and other games of chance:
• Select winners on objective criteria, not by chance
• Essay Contest
• Bake-off
• Trivia contest
• POPULAR VOTING = Skill?
Skill Contests
3737
▪ Is a game skill based or chance based?• Majority of states: Dominant element
• Minority of states: Any Chance
• Long line of cases interpreting:
• Backgammon
• Billiards
• Pinball Machine
• Poker
• Three card monte
Skill Contests
3838
• Consideration OK in most states
– Difficult question whether consideration permitted,
depending on the state
– State laws are old and poorly drafted
• Some states consideration (pay to play) is
prohibited – void these states
Skill Contests (Cont’d)
3939
• DISASTER STRIKES!
– Tie-breaker, after true skill contest = flip a coin.
– Congratulations – you now have a game of chance
– Practical Tip: All aspects of how winners are selected
and prizes are awarded must be skill based
Skill Contests (Cont’d)
4040
SWEEPSTAKES AND SKILL CONTESTS
• Popular Voting Contests– If giving away prizes of ANY value based on popular voting, EXPECT
voter fraud
– Require voters to register?
– Prohibit automated voting, use of voting exchange sites
– Can be tough to police – IT dept. may just ‘suspect’ problem
– Don’t display vote results in real time
41
Sweepstakes and Skill Contests
Many promotions now running on social media
platforms– Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, YouTube, etc.
– Your social media accounts and pages are ALWAYS
subject to the platforms’ good graces. Follow their
rules.
42
Sweepstakes and Skill Contests
Analysis: Skill v. Chance
Fantasy Sports –
One game versus
Compete over course of a season
SKILL OR CHANCE???
43
Sweepstakes and Skill Contests
Fantasy Sports – Big Change in 2006
▪ Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. • Bush Admin. DOJ, attempt to clarify that Internet gambling is prohibited.
▪ FS Industry strong enough to include an exemption for Fantasy Sports.
▪ Def. of FS Key: Prize Value established in advance, not by # of entrants.
▪ Winning outcomes reflect the knowledge/skill of participants.
▪ Outcome determined by individual statistical results in multiple real world sporting events.
▪ No winning outcome based on outcome of score of any game or combination of games or on any single performance of an individual athlete in a single real world event.
44
Sweepstakes and Skill Contests
Fantasy Sports – State Gambling Laws
▪ Navigate state gambling statutes.
▪ Skill Analysis.
▪ Gambling statutes include skill contests exemptions.
▪ Bet or Wager Analysis.
▪ Some states have expressly deemed fantasy league games to constitute unlawful gambling.
▪ White v. Cuomo, Oct. 26, 2018 – NY State law outlaws Fantasy Sports.
45
Sweepstakes and Skill Contests
Analysis: Prize – Does it have value?
Loot Boxes
46
Sweepstakes and Skill Contests
LOOT BOXES
a/k/a “What’s an online prize anyway?”1. Video games - boxes of digital items with unknown value can be obtained either through
game play or through purchase with real world currency. “What’s in the Box?”
A. Magic sword
B. Methril armor
C. Invisibility cloak
D. Pixie dust
E. Wand (Stupid, amiright?)
2. Free to play video games have used loot boxes to monetize. The idea that video game players may use real world dollars to buy real (but virtual) items.
47
Sweepstakes and Skill Contests
LOOT BOXES
a/k/a “What’s an online prize anyway?”
1. Are virtual goods akin to mere bragging rights?
2. There are third party marketplaces for virtual items, not operated by or benefiting the video game operator.
3. FTC held a workshop to analyze Loot Boxes
4. UK says not illegal; Belgium and Netherlands banned some loot box activities.
5. Other consumer protection issues involved, e.g. no posted odds of winning coveted prizes.
48
Sweepstakes and Skill Contests
So…What is a PRIZE?
Does a virtual item have “Value”? Factors to consider:
1. How player acquired virtual currency (earned through game play or paid with cold hard cash)
2. What can you do with them: cash out for $$$, or just use to acquire virtual goods / services
3. Use it where – on issuer’s site/game only, or whether third party marketplace exists
4. Definition of “thing of value” in specific state’s gambling law
49
A little more on Loot Boxes
• Recent Developments in Loot Box law• California (bill – dead, warning labels on games w/MT)
• Hawaii (bill – minimum age (21) to buy loot crates)
• Minnesota (bill – minimum age (18) to buy loot crates; also disclose odds)
• Indiana (bill – AG asked to look into loot crates: “predatory”, “prey on children”, “gambling”)
• Washington (bill – state gambling commission will determine if LC are “gambling” / age to access)
• Federal (bill – banning pay-to-win and kids microtrans)
• Belgium (LC in FIFA 18, Overwatch, and CS:GO are gambling)
• Netherlands (Gambling regulators found multiple devs w/ LC in violation of existing law, Valvetargeted)
• China (Disclose drop rates for winnable items)
• Japan Law for Preventing Unjustifiable Extras or Unexpected Benefit and Misleading Representation (ban on kompugacha)
• South Korea (Korea Association of Games Industry self-regulation; discloses drop rates; South Korean FTC fines of nearly $1M for misleading advertising around loot crates)
• EA, Square pulling games; Epic, Psyonix changing practices
50
Loot Boxes (cont’d)
• First Amendment
51
Loot Boxes (cont’d)
• First Amendment
• FTC & Loot Boxes - Discussion August 7th, 2019
• Academics, industry, consumer watchdogs
• Same morning, ESA announcement:• Nintendo, Sony & Microsoft commit:
mandate loot box odds disclosure before 2021
• Same pledge by a number of publishers on any platform
• (Lawyers believe in coincidences but I don’t think this is one of them.)
• Video online; gameindustry.biz summary article: • https://bit.ly/2U3ORQt
• A lot of “level setting”
52
Loot Boxes (cont’d)
• Advocates:• lower cost;
• self-regulation;
• First Amendment;
• “narrative integrity”
53
Loot Boxes (cont’d)
• Advocates:• lower cost;
• self-regulation;
• First Amendment;
• “narrative integrity”
• Concerns• Are games manipulating odds to maximize monetization?
• Information asymmetry re virtual currency, discounts
• “Feels” like, gateway to, gambling
54
Entries – Age Considerations
Issues with Children
• COPPA (more to follow)
55
Entries – Age Considerations
Issues with Children
• COPPA (more to follow)
• Rescission Laws/Minors and Capacity to Contract
56
Children, cont’d
CARU self-regulatory guidelines: “Sweepstakes and Contests:
• Advertisers should recognize that children may have unrealistic expectations about the chances of winning a sweepstakes or contest or inflated expectations of the prize(s) to be won.
• The prize(s) should be clearly depicted.
• The free means of entry should be clearly disclosed.
• The likelihood of winning should be clearly disclosed in language readily understandable to the child audience. Disclosures such as, “Many will enter, a few will win.” Should be used, where appropriate. 12
• All prizes should be appropriate to the child audience.
• Online contests or sweepstakes should not require the child to provide more information than is reasonably necessary. Any information collection must meet the requirements of the Data Collection section of the Guidelines and the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA).”
57
Entries: Geographic Considerations
• Don’t assume the foreign laws regarding Sweepstakes/Contest, mirror those of the US (even Canada)
58
Entries: Geographic Considerations
• Don’t assume the foreign laws regarding Sweepstakes/Contest, mirror those of the US (even Canada)
• Sampling of Foreign Laws on Sweepstakes:• Canada – Games of chance prohibited. All winners must pass a skill test (gen.
math problem)• Quebec – all rules, advertising, etc. must be in English and French.• Mexico – Prizes over USD 5,000 must be delivered in presence of Mexican
authorities.• Brazil – prohibited unless permission is granted by Ministry of Finance. • Sweden – Games of chance require permit from the Swedish Gaming board.
Games of skill permitted. • Netherlands – Games of chance prohibited if purpose of promotion is collection of
personal data. Individual prizes cannot exceed EUR 2,500. Total prizes for promotion cannot exceed EUR 100,000.
• Ireland – Games of Chance if purchase is required, unless sponsor is non-profit charity.
• Italy – Promotion just be registered, bonded and rules must be reviewed by Italian attorney. Winners must be selected in the presence of an Italian Notary Public or Officer of the Chamber of Commerce. If selection of winners is done electronically, must have expert certify that result generation of the system cannot be altered.
59
Entries: Geographic Considerations
• Don’t assume state laws regarding Sweepstakes/Contest, mirror those of your state
60
Entries: Geographic Considerations
• Don’t assume state laws regarding Sweepstakes/Contest, mirror those of your state
• Sampling of State Laws to consider• Arizona – Sponsors of contests which require the purchase of a product
must pre-register with the Arizona Attorney General. Ariz. Rev. Stat. §13-3311.
• Colorado, Maryland, Nebraska, North Dakota, Vermont – No contest or sweepstakes may require entrants to make a purchase or provide other forms of consideration to enter the promotion as a condition of allowing the person to receive, use, compete for, or obtain a prize or information about a prize.
• Michigan and Virginia – requiring entrants to visit a store constitutes consideration and is prohibited in sweepstakes.
• Rhode Island – requires registration for prizes over $500 if the promotion takes place at a retail location.
• New York and Florida – Require a bond and pre-registration for prizes over $5,000.
61
Entries: Privacy Issues
• Include Privacy Policy or PP reminder in Official Rules–make sure rules/procedure are consistent with policy.
• CCPA and GDPR- Depending on the characteristics of the sponsor, promotion, entrants and how the personal information of entrants will be used, CCPA and/or GDPR compliance may be an issue.
62
Entries: Privacy Issues
• CCPA - In general, the CCPA will soon apply to a “business” that:• does business in the State of California,• collects personal information (or on behalf of which such information is collected),• alone or jointly with others determines the purposes or means of processing of that
data, and• satisfies one or more of the following:
• annual gross revenue in excess of $25 million,• alone or in combination, annually buys, receives for the business’s commercial purposes, sells,
or shares for commercial purposes, alone or in combination, the personal information of 50,000 or more consumers, households, or devices, or
• derives 50 percent or more of its annual revenues from selling consumers’ personal information.
• a “business” can be a “sole proprietorship, partnership, limited liability company, corporation, association, or other legal entity that is organized or operated for the profit or financial benefit of its shareholders or other owners” or any entity that controls or is controlled by a business that meets the requirements.
63
Entries: Privacy Issues
• CCPA - In general, the CCPA will soon apply to a “business” that:• does business in the State of California,• collects personal information (or on behalf of which such information is collected),• alone or jointly with others determines the purposes or means of processing of that
data, and• satisfies one or more of the following:
• annual gross revenue in excess of $25 million,• alone or in combination, annually buys, receives for the business’s commercial purposes, sells,
or shares for commercial purposes, alone or in combination, the personal information of 50,000 or more consumers, households, or devices, or
• derives 50 percent or more of its annual revenues from selling consumers’ personal information.
• a “business” can be a “sole proprietorship, partnership, limited liability company, corporation, association, or other legal entity that is organized or operated for the profit or financial benefit of its shareholders or other owners” or any entity that controls or is controlled by a business that meets the requirements.
• GDPR – currently applies to any company collecting data on EU citizens (even ip addresses)
64
Equal Dignities
• Equal Dignities- Sweepstakes that involve consideration must provide an AMOE on an “equal” basis to non-paying participants to negate consideration. The concept of “equal dignity” to validate a free AMOE in a flexible participation sweepstakes has been shaped by case law in regard to (i) method of entry, (ii) opportunity to win, (iii) claiming prizes, and (iv) prizes awarded.
65
Equal Dignities
• Equal Dignities- Sweepstakes that involve consideration must provide an AMOE on an “equal” basis to non-paying participants to negate consideration. The concept of “equal dignity” to validate a free AMOE in a flexible participation sweepstakes has been shaped by case law in regard to (i) method of entry, (ii) opportunity to win, (iii) claiming prizes, and (iv) prizes awarded.
• Tylenol and CVS –• Tylenol overemphasized the purchased-based method of entry (i.e. Buy
Tylenol) and placed AMOE in fine print. • Court ruled free entry method was not equally available to all entrants
• CVS automatically entered customers into sweepstakes when they purchased certain products. Also had AMOE on their website (not in their store).
• NY atty gen argued that visitors to the store who wanted to enter sweepstakes didn’t have same opportunity as those who purchased CVS products.
66
Equal Dignities
• Equal Dignities- Sweepstakes that involve consideration must provide an AMOE on an “equal” basis to non-paying participants to negate consideration. The concept of “equal dignity” to validate a free AMOE in a flexible participation sweepstakes has been shaped by case law in regard to (i) method of entry, (ii) opportunity to win, (iii) claiming prizes, and (iv) prizes awarded.
• Tylenol and CVS –• Tylenol overemphasized the purchased-based method of entry (i.e. Buy
Tylenol) and placed AMOE in fine print. • Court ruled free entry method was not equally available to all entrants
• CVS automatically entered customers into sweepstakes when they purchased certain products. Also had AMOE on their website (not in their store).
• NY atty gen argued that visitors to the store who wanted to enter sweepstakes didn’t have same opportunity as those who purchased CVS products.
• See also - Mid-Atlantic Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Chen, Walsh, & Tecler
• Even a game with a free AMOE may be deemed a lottery if the promoter fails to widely publicize the availability of free entries.
67
Equal Dignities: Opportunity to Win
• Non-paying entrants should not have greater obstacles to winning the prize. Paying and non-paying entrants should have the same odds of winning.
• Black North Assocs., Inc. v. Kelly (NY)• Illegal lottery where a sponsor’s vending machine charged $1 and
dispensed game pieces for prizes from $1 - $500, but also offered free game pieces upon request at the bar counter or by mail, and where there was a sign stating the no purchase was necessary.
• Decision turned on the fact that free entrants were limited to a game piece a day, while those paying could purchase as many game pieces as they wished.
68
Equal Dignities: Claiming Prizes
• Sponsors should make it as easy for non-paying winners to claim their prize as paying winners.
• Supreme Judicial Court of Mass. v. Wall, • Lottery where the sponsor was a movie theater and the drawing took
place inside the theater.
• Only paying participants could enter and hear the names of the winners being called, while the non-paying participants had to wait outside in uncomfortable conditions and non-paying winners had to find a way to discover if they had won and get through a crowd to claim their prize in the specified amount of time.
69
Equal Dignities: Prizes
• Non-paying entrants should have an equal opportunity to win all the prizes offered.
• Classic Oldsmobile-Cadillac-GMC Truck, Inc. v. State (Maine) • Car retailer had promotion where anyone who leased a new car during a
four-week period would have their monthly payments paid if the temperature equaled or exceeded 96 degrees.
• AMOE was to enter into a drawing and the winner would receive $5,000 if the temperature reached or exceeded 96 degrees.
• Court found there to be two promotions with two different prizes.
• Also significant was that everyone who entered a lease would have won their prize but only one of the non-paying entrants would have won the drawing.
70
User Generated Content
• Do entries involve uploading of user generated content?
71
User Generated Content
• Do entries involve uploading of user generated content?
• Photos/videos/written materials• Social media posts
• Reviews (additional FTC issues)
72
User Generated Content
• Do entries involve uploading of user generated content?
• Photos/videos/written materials• Social media posts
• Reviews (additional FTC issues)
• Rules regarding content of materials• Depiction of minors
• Defamation
• Obscenity
• Infringement (third-party materials, third-party marks)
• Privacy
73
Selection
• Chance• All entries failing to meet the entry requirements outlined in the
official rules should be removed (for example, entries that fail to meet the age, geographic requirements, or which weren’t submitted within the specified dates or which were submitted in any other manner inconsistent with the rules).
• Winner is chosen randomly from the remaining eligible entries in the manner defined in the official rules.
• Skill• Judging standards must be outlined in the official rules and must
be clear enough for entrants to understand;
• Winners must be selected in accordance with these standards; and
• Judges must be competent to evaluate the entries based on the standards.
74
Selection: Tie?
• Official rules should be clear about how ties are to be handled.
• Avoid turning a contest into a game of chance by breaking ties in a random manner.
75
Selection: Tie?
• Official rules should be clear about how ties are to be handled.
• Avoid turning a contest into a game of chance by breaking ties in a random manner.
• Solution could be to award prizes to all tying entrants.
76
Selection: Tie?
• Official rules should be clear about how ties are to be handled.
• Avoid turning a contest into a game of chance by breaking ties in a random manner.
• Solution could be to award prizes to all tying entrants.
• Alternative: weighted evaluation criteria and allowing the tie to be broken in favor of the better performer on the more heavily weighted criteria.
77
Awarding Prizes
Sampling of State Laws Regarding Prize Award Procedure
• California –
• Sponsor must award and distribute all prizes 'of the value and type represented'. Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17539.1.
• Sponsor must send, upon request by contestant, names of all winners, the prize won by each and, if applicable, the
correct solution and the winning solution (if different). Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17539.2.
• Florida – All prizes offered must be awarded. Fl. Stat. §849.094(2)(c).
• Illinois – Prizes must be awarded within 30 days of announcing the winner. 815 ILCS 525/30.
• Nebraska – Sponsor shall not fail to award the prizes offered. N.R.S. § 9-701(3)(c).
• New York – Within 90 days of completion of promotion where the prizes offered exceed US$5,000,
sponsor must file with the Secretary of State a listing of the name and address of each winner of every
prize having a value of more than $25, description of the prize, and date prize was delivered. N.Y. Gen.
Laws § 369-e(5).
• Rhode Island – Misdemeanor offense of prizes offered are not distributed. R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-50-5.
78
Winner Releases/affidavits
• Eligibility Affidavit• Verifying the entrant is legally eligible to win the prize, the
information was correct, entry was in compliance with the rules, and that entrant agrees to the terms and restrictions contained in the official rules
79
Winner Releases/affidavits
• Eligibility Affidavit• Verifying the entrant is legally eligible to win the prize, the
information was correct, entry was in compliance with the rules, and that entrant agrees to the terms and restrictions contained in the official rules
• Liability / publicity waivers• Giving Sponsor right to public winner’s name and likeness, etc.
• Note: in Tennessee sweepstakes sponsors are prohibited from requiring winners to sign “in perpetuity” publicity releases.
• Restating liability waiver in the official rules
80
Winner Releases/affidavits
• Eligibility Affidavit• Verifying the entrant is legally eligible to win the prize, the
information was correct, entry was in compliance with the rules, and that entrant agrees to the terms and restrictions contained in the official rules
• Liability / publicity waivers• Giving Sponsor right to public winner’s name and likeness, etc.
• Note: in Tennessee sweepstakes sponsors are prohibited from requiring winners to sign “in perpetuity” publicity releases.
• Restating liability waiver in the official rules
• Releases to include in official rules• Liability “By participating in the sweepstakes, participants agree to
release, discharge, and hold harmless sponsor…….”
• “Sponsor is not responsible for lost, late, stolen, illegible… entries”
• Internet or system failures
81
Liability - Public
• Penalties for Federal Law Violations -• FTC enforcement action under Section 5 of FTC Act – remedies
include injunctions, civil penalties and audits
• DMA – US Postal Inspection Service – temporary restraining orders, injunctions, civil penalties up to $2 million dollars.
• FCC – minimum fines of $4,000 for each violation.
82
Liability - Public
• Penalties for Federal Law Violations -• FTC enforcement action under Section 5 of FTC Act – remedies include
injunctions, civil penalties and audits
• DMA – US Postal Inspection Service – temporary restraining orders, injunctions, civil penalties up to $2 million dollars.
• FCC – minimum fines of $4,000 for each violation.
• Penalties for State Law Violations (sampling)• Arizona – violations = class I misdemeanors
• California –• violations amounting to unfair business practices -> injunctions, civil penalties up
to $2,500 per violations;
• violations of illegal gambling law -> fines from $100-$1000 and 6 months in jail
• Colorado – civil penalties up to $10,000 per violation
• Florida – civil penalties up to $1,000
• Massachusetts – fines up to $2,000 or 1 year imprisonment
• NY- violations are Class B Misdemeanors
• Texas – civil penalties between $5,000 and $50,000 per violation
83
Liability - Civil
• Actions by Government Entities• Tylenol and CVS cases
84
Liability - Civil
• Actions by Government Entities• Tylenol and CVS cases
• Actions by Competitors• Burger King v McDonalds- Burger King franchisees sued McD’s
under the Lanham Act for continuing to run its monopoly promotion even after learning that the games were rigged.
85
Liability - Civil
• Actions by Government Entities• Tylenol and CVS cases
• Actions by Competitors• Burger King v McDonalds- Burger King franchisees sued McD’s
under the Lanham Act for continuing to run its monopoly promotion even after learning that the games were rigged.
• Actions by Unhappy Participants• Big Fish Casino (Kater v Churchill Downs)- Washington law
defines gambling as: “the staking or risking something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under the person’s control or influence, upon an agreement or understanding that the person or someone else will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome.”
• 9th cir ruled that the game’s free game chips are a “thing of value” in the context of Washington Gambling law, making these games fall under the category of illegal gambling.
86
Protecting yourself from mistakes
• Cases where too many winners are picked due to clerical, typographical, or other errors.
87
Protecting yourself from mistakes
• Cases where too many winners are picked due to clerical, typographical, or other errors.
• Ways to Avoid:• Clearly state the method of winner selection
• Clearly state the number and value of prizes to be award
• Include disclaimer: “ the sponsor is not responsible for any printing or typographical error in any material associated with the sweepstakes.”
88
Insurance
• Prize indemnity insurance / sweepstakes indemnity insurance
• Odds of winning low; potential pay out high
89
Insurance
• Prize indemnity insurance / sweepstakes indemnity insurance
• Odds of winning low; potential pay out high
• Can be for games of chance (triggered by happening of event beyond participant’s control) or skill (ex. Amateur making a hole in one in golf tournament (note Canada))
• Furniture and Football
• Furniture store in Baltimore offered a promotion where anything sold between Jan 31 and Feb 3 would be free if a Ravens player returned the Superbowl opening or second-half kickoff for a touchdown. Luckily they bought insurance, because Jacoby Jones did just that and the store ended up owing its customers about $600,000.
90
Insurance
• Prize indemnity insurance / sweepstakes indemnity insurance
• Odds of winning low; potential pay out high
• Can be for games of chance (triggered by happening of event beyond participant’s control) or skill (ex. Amateur making a hole in one in golf tournament (note Canada))
• Furniture and Football
• Furniture store in Baltimore offered a promotion where anything sold between Jan 31 and Feb 3 would be free if a Ravens player returned the Superbowl opening or second-half kickoff for a touchdown. Luckily they bought insurance, because Jacoby Jones did just that and the store ended up owing its customers about $600,000.
• If the insurer fails to pay the Sponsor is still on the hook
91
Questions?
Brandon J. Huffman
Odin Law and Media
@brandonjhuffman
Barry M. Benjamin
Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton
(212) 775-8783
92