網路時代之薦證廣告與其管制

Regulating Endorsements and Testimonials in Cyberspace

王明禮(Ming-Li Wang)

公平交易法 ； 不實廣告 ； 薦證廣告 ； 言論自由 ； 商業性言論 ； 網際網路 ； competition law ； false advertising ； endorsements and testimonials ； commercial speech ； Internet

東吳法律學報

28卷4期（2017 / 04 / 01）

129 - 163

繁體中文

隨著網際網路之普及與社群網路之興起，網路行銷（digital marketing）乃至社群行銷（social marketing）成為熱門的行銷手法，薦證廣告－特別是非由名人或專家代言之素人薦證廣告－似有越來越流行之趨勢。公平交易委員會於2013年底、2015年初與今（2017）年初三度修訂「公平交易委員會對於薦證廣告之規範說明」，以期讓相關從業人員與一般社會大眾能對此種行為應遵守之規範，有更清楚之認識。然而從薦證廣告逾一個半世紀之發展史，可以發現相關權利與法制之變遷，實與當代科技、文化與市場之演變習習相關。近年的發展，只是這一連串社會演化的最新一段轉折而已。如欲對此等行為之走向與相關問題之發展趨勢有所掌握，並有適切之法律因應對策，則應對當前網路社會之基礎結構、文化脈絡與市場走向有更深一層之認識。商業性言論（含薦證廣告）之所以較一般言論受到較低之憲法保障，乃因對商業性言論之限制（在合理範圍內），不易對商業活動造成阻礙，寒蟬效應之顧慮也較輕微，同時也因在傳統媒體時代，廣告與非廣告區分相對容易。然而，網路時代之科技、文化與市場變化，已經賦與薦證廣告嶄新的面貌，原有的假設已高度鬆動，薦證廣告之管制，正受到空前的挑戰。基於此等認識，本文主張，薦證廣告之法規範不應該僅求確保對網路上廣告行為之有效涵攝，尚應留意避免對不具商業動機之分享活動造成嚇阻。現有之薦證廣告規範說明，因此有再檢討與修正之必要。

With the Internet deeply interwoven with the fabric of our society and the rise of social media, digital marketing and social marketing have been the buzzwords of 21-century marketing. Endorsements and testimonials, in particular those propagated through the words of ordinary users, have been on the rise as a result. To give proper guidance to cyber-marketing practitioners, the Fair Trade Commission of Taiwan revised its Endorsements and Testimonials Guides three times, in late 2013, early 2015 and earlier this year respectively, to erase any doubt that endorsements and testimonials propagated online are also forms of advertising, and thus should be mindful of the perimeters for lawful advertising. In particular, it emphasizes the need to disclose any material connections between an endorser and an advertiser. The history of commercial endorsements and testimonials, however, reminded us how a once despised advertising technique grew into a staple in modern media culture following a series of changes in technology and society. Thus, to gain a proper perspective of the ongoing evolution in online advertising through end-user testimonials necessitates closer examinations of the architectural, social and economic conditions of cyberspace. As the first large-scale many-to-many media, the Internet has not only brought us an expressive, chatty and vibrant online culture but also given rise to pervasive tacit advertising through end-user testimonials. Paid testimonials and independent product reviews are no longer clearly distinguishable, with many shades of gray lying in between. Two of the old assumptions underscoring lowered constitutional protection for commercial speech-one pointing to commercial speech's greater resistance to chilling effect and the other pointing to a well-defined target-are suddenly no longer valid. Requiring disclosure of material connections as outlined in the newest Guides, while might be welcome for bringing much needed transparency to the scene, could therefore burden non-commercial speech unfairly (and unconstitutionally). Some adjustments are desired.

1. 黃昭元(2013)。大法官解釋審查標準之發展（1996-2011）：比例原則的繼受與在地化。臺大法學論叢，42(2)，215-258。
   連結：
2. 黃昭元(2004)。憲法權利限制的司法審查標準：美國類型化多元標準模式的比較分析。臺大法學論叢，33(3)，45-148。
   連結：
3. 黃銘傑(1998)。美國法上的言論自由與商業廣告：兼論司法院大法官會議釋字第四一四號解釋。台大法學論叢，27(2)，347-393。
   連結：
4. New York Times Co. V. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964).
5. Warren, Samuel & Louis Brandeis, The Right to Privacy, 4 HARV. L. REV. 193-220 (1890)
6. 司法院大法官解釋：司法院釋字第414 號解釋。
7. 司法院大法官解釋：司法院釋字第664 號解釋。
8. FTC Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising, 16 C.F.R. § 255.5 (2016).
9. 司法院大法官解釋：司法院釋字第744 號解釋，黃昭元大法官不同意見書。
10. 司法院大法官解釋：司法院釋字第670 號解釋，陳新民大法官部分協同、部分不同意見書。
11. 司法院大法官解釋：司法院釋字第577 號解釋。
12. Fed. Trade Comm'n, Native Advertising: A Guide for Businesses, FED. TRADE COMM'N (Dec. 2015), https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/native-advertising-guide-businesses.
13. Sisario, Ben, Copyright for 'Happy Birthday' Invalidated, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 22, 2015, at B4.
14. 公平交易委員會新聞資料，2013 年11 月8 日，http://www.ftc.gov.tw/internet/main/doc/docDetail.aspx? uid=126&docid=13014 [https://web.archive.org/web/20140410001836/ http://www.ftc.gov.tw/internet/main/doc/docDetail.aspx?uid=126&docid=13014]。
15. Hoffman v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc., 255 F.3d 1180 (9th Cir. 2001).
16. 司法院大法官解釋：司法院釋字第678 號解釋，許玉秀大法官一部協同一部不同意見書。
17. 司法院大法官解釋：司法院釋字第623 號解釋，林子儀大法官不同意見書。
18. Fed. Trade Comm'n, FTC Policy Statement on Deception, FED. TRADE COMM'N, (Oct. 14, 1983), https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/410531/831014deceptionstmt.pdf.
19. Wieman v. Updegraff, 344 U.S. 183 (1952).
20. 司法院大法官解釋：司法院釋字第744 號解釋，羅昌發大法官協同意見書。
21. Elliott, Stuart, Social Marketing Drives a New York Renaissance, N.Y. Times, Apr. 1, 2013, at B6.
22. 司法院大法官解釋：司法院釋字第662 號解釋。
23. 公平交易委員會，公處字第102184 號處分書(2013)。
24. Vega, Tanzina & Stuart Elliott, At Ad Week, the Vital Role of Digital Marketing, N.Y. TIMES, Oct. 3, 2012, at B3.
25. Kasperkevic, Jana, Music Publisher Agrees to Pay $14m to End Happy Birthday Song Lawsuit, GUARDIAN (Feb. 9, 2016), https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/feb/09/happy-birthday-song-lawsuit-warner-chappell-settlement.
26. (2002)。台灣憲法之縱剖橫切。元照。
27. AMAR, AKHIL REED(1998).THE BILL OF RIGHTS.
28. Armstrong, George M., Jr.(1991).The Reification of Celebrity: Persons as Property.LA. L. REV.,51,443-468.
29. Evans, David S.(2003).The Antitrust Economics of Multi-sided Platform Markets.YALE J. ON REG.,20,325-381.
30. Farber, Daniel A.(2009).The Categorical Approach to Protecting Speech in American Constitutional Law.IND. L.J.,84,917-938.
31. Feinman, Leah W.(2011).Note, Celebrity Endorsements in Non-Traditional Advertising: How the FTC Regulations Fail to Keep Up with the Kardashians.FORDHAM INTELL. PROP. MEDIA & ENT. L.J.,22,97.
32. Freund, Paul A.(1951).The Supreme Court and Civil Liberties.VAND. L. REV.,4,533-554.
33. FRIEDMAN, LAWRENCE M.(2005).A HISTORY OF AMERICAN LAW.
34. HAFNER, KATIE,LYON, MATTHEW(1996).WHERE WIZARDS STAY UP LATE: THE ORIGINS OF THE INTERNET.
35. Leichtman, David(2011).Transformative Use Comes of Age in Right of Publicity Litigation.LANDSLIDE,Sept./Oct.,28-35.
36. Lemley, Mark A.,Lessig, Lawrence(2001).The End of End-to-End: Preserving the Architecture of the Internet in the Broadband Era.UCLA L. REV.,48,925-986.
37. LESSIG, LAWRENCE(2001).THE FUTURE OF IDEAS.
38. LESSIG, LAWRENCE(2008).REMIX: MAKING ART AND COMMERCE THRIVE IN THE HYBRID ECONOMY.
39. PIETY, TAMARA(2012).BRANDISHING THE FIRST AMENDMENT: COMMERCIAL EXPRESSION IN AMERICA.
40. Pomeranz, Jennifer L.(2010).No Need to Break New Ground: A Response to the Supreme Court's Threat to Overhaul the Commercial Speech Doctrine.LOY. L.A. L. REV.,45,389-434.
41. POSNER, RICHARD(1986).ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF LAW.
42. Post, Robert(2000).The Constitutional Status of Commercial Speech.UCLA L. REV.,48,1-58.
43. Rochet, Jean-Charles,Tirole, Jean(2006).Two-Sided Market: A Progress Report.RAND J. ECON.,37,645.
44. STARR, PAUL(2004).THE CREATION OF THE MEDIA.
45. STONE, GEOFFREY R.(2016).THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
46. Sullivan, Kathleen M.(2010).Two Concepts of Freedom of Speech.HARV. L. REV.,124,143-177.
47. SULLIVAN, KATHLEEN M.,FELDMAN, NOAH(2016).CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.
48. Tushnet, Rebecca(2007).Trademark Law as Commercial Speech Regulation.S.C. L. REV.,58,737-756.
49. Wang, Ming-Li(2012).The Fourth Estate Under Siege: The Making of a Democratic Institution and Its Pressing Challenges.NAT'L TAIWAN U. L. REV.,7,385-422.
50. Zittrain, Jonathan L.(2006).The Generative Internet.HARV. L. REV.,119,1974-2040.
51. 公平交易委員會(2016)。公平交易統計年報：中華民國104年。
52. 公平交易委員會(2015)。認識公平交易法。行政院公平交易委員會。
53. 王明禮(2011)。從「點鑽案」看雙邊市場之競爭與管制。第十一屆行政法實務與理論學術研討會
54. 王明禮(2014)。論資訊隱私：科技與商業發展脈絡下的觀察。中原財經法學，32，59-105。
55. 林子儀(2002)。言論自由與新聞自由。元照。
56. 陳仲嶙(2011)。商業性言論憲法解釋十年回顧與評析。中原財經法學，27，101-150。
57. 黃銘傑(2002)。公平交易法之理論與實際：不同意見書。學林文化。
58. 劉靜怡(2008)。色情何辜？如何看待大法官釋字六一七號及釋字六二三號。色情無價：認真看待色情
59. 謝銘洋(2010)。從美國法上之商業利用權(right of publicity)探討肖像權之財產權化─最高法院九十七年台上字第一三九六號民事判決解析。月旦裁判時報，4，102-108。

1. 李姿瑩(2019)。網紅經濟下薦證廣告之薦證者規範。科技法律透析，31(12)，18-25。
2. (2019)。論日本不實廣告之規範與運用－兼論對我國法之啟示。公平交易季刊，27(4)，105-156。
3. (2021)。不公平競爭法規對新興薦證廣告之適用與因應：美國、加拿大、英國、臺灣之比較。公平交易季刊，29(3)，1-64。
4. (2022)。我國不實廣告執法實務之評析－以公平法與其他法規之適用為中心。公平交易季刊，30(3)，49-98。
5. (2023)。德國 2022 年不正競爭防止法新法關於資訊透明化之規範—兼談對我國公平法的啟示。公平交易季刊，31(4)，1-44。
6. (2023)。數位平臺經濟之結合管制。公平交易季刊，31(2)，41-80。