Monday, December 31, 2007

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

If you haven't already, scroll down to read about the highly-controversial Home Depot contest on YouTube, and see video proof of the modifications they allowed AFTER the contest was over, just to keep the winner compliant with their own rules.

Speaking of rules... since there have been a few people who have sought to minimize this whole scenario by claiming it was "Home Depot's money and contest, it was artistic expression - so leave them alone" (eerily reminiscent of the "Leave Britney Alone!" on YouTube); remember contests are very much regulated. Read this excerpt from a document on venable.com regarding internet contests (emphasis added):

Rules. There should be a set of rules that promotion participants can read and understand, and which should be provided, or at least disclosed, when the promoter notifies consumers about the promotion. The rules should clearly and accurately explain who is qualified to participate, how the promoter will run the promotion and choose the winner(s), what the prize(s) will be, the value of the prize(s), and the deadline for entry. The rules should also include the odds of winning, or an estimate of the probable number of people who will be eligible to participate. In addition, the rules should also explain the free method of entry if some entrants may also be making a purchase.

Certainly, the rules should include protections for the promotion sponsor, such as limitations on the number of entries permitted and the manner in which entries may be submitted (e.g., precluding bulk-mail entries). The promotion rules should be written carefully, because the sponsor will be legally bound to adhere to them once the promotion begins.

...

Eligibility should also be conditioned on compliance with the Official Rules.

...

Perhaps the most important thing to remember is that the creativity and low-cost of the Internet as a medium should not be an excuse to avoid legal compliance. If anything, it should up the ante, as the reach of the Internet is incredibly broad, and legal compliance becomes all the more important when one’s promotional campaign may be virally emailed all across cyberspace.

Also, if you want to read a "snapshot" of many of the comments that were on Home Depot's YouTube channel (the ones that were screaming foul play, before they removed them), go to another blog who is equally concerned about the contest http://hdexposed.blogspot.com/


ADDENDUM: THE STATUTE CHALLENGE

If you haven't read it already, scroll down to read all of the drama that unfolded when Home Depot allowed a contest entrant to change their video AFTER the contest was over, just to allow them to maintain their "win".

NOTE: It was called to my attention that since nobody has yet been able to substantiate Home Depot's/IMRE Communications' actions as legal, we should not only be looking for statutes that would explain that what Home Depot did was LEGAL, but also for statutes that would explain that what Home Depot did was ILLEGAL. By that, I mean statutes, prior cases, or documents from contest administrator organizations. Thanks to those who have e-mailed me some very interesting stuff. Since e-mail seems to be the venue of choice for people, the e-mail address to send these to is posted under the "profile" section. Good luck!