Companies cannot redefine English words for their marketing or sales of a product
This should be an obvious policy, but it’s happening all over the place.
Policy
A company cannot make a statement in their marketing for a product, but then redefine some of the words used in their “fine print” such that it no longer has the English language definition.
Reasoning
This makes it so that when the customer reads this marketing, assumes they’re reading English and understands the marketing one way, but the company’s definition is hidden away in their “fine print” that is not clear to consumers and frankly not read by 99% of consumers in the first place and makes the English words mean something completely different.
Example 1
The digital sale of products typically include the terms “Buy” or “Purchase” leading the consumer to think they’re going to obtain unrestricted access and control of the item they’re “Buying” or “Purchasing”. When a consumer “Buys” or “Purchases” a product, that should transfer ownership of the product or a copy of the product to the consumer. This means the company selling this product cannot remove access to the product and the user can do whatever they want with the product be it give it to another person or re-sell it.
If this transfer of ownership doesn’t occur, the company selling the product must use adequite terms like “Lease” or “Rent”.
California actually started down this path by passing a law in late 2024, however I think this should be expanded such that companies can’t mislead consumers by redefining ANY term (not just “Purchase” or “Buy”) if it would be false advertising by using the English definition of the term.
Example 2
The Ohio Supreme court has ruled on July 25, 2024 that “Boneless Chicken” can in fact have bones in it.
This is just absolutely absurd. If a product is marketed as being “Boneless”, then the consumer should reasonably expect the product to have no bones in it. That’s the English definition of the word “Boneless”. This court decision opens the door for companies to just straight up lie in their marketing. Now “Sugar-free” drinks can contain sugar, “Gluten-free” bread can contain gluten.
https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2024/2024-ohio-2787.pdf
https://www.courtnewsohio.gov/cases/2024/SCO/0725/230293.asp