.webp)
A-List Creator + Major Brand = Truth in Advertising? Well not always. Influencer marketing can feel like a shortcut to authenticity, especially if it is your a famous and well known influencer doing the marketing. As recent legal disputes show, neither perfect content nor contractual terms alone will shield brands from legal liability when disclosures are missing or unclear.
For years, influencer enforcement has been the FTC’s domain. But in early 2025, three massive class actions are open and seeking 1 1$ Billion In Damages
1. Bengoechea et al. v. Shein et al. (N.D. Ill., Feb. 10, 2025)
Consumers nationwide sued fast-fashion giant Shein—and a roster of influencers including Bianca Anastasia Arcori and Abby Bagley—alleging they worked together to create a facade of organic hype while hiding paid endorsements. The suit claims:
- Influencers were paid to promote Shein but didn’t clearly say so in their posts.
- Any disclosures were buried in long hashtags or hidden behind “more” links, not “clear and conspicuous.”
- Shoppers paid premium prices believing the hype was genuine, only to get lower-quality products.
Shein’s U.S. revenue reportedly jumped from $3 billion in 2019 to $30 billion in 2022—growth plaintiffs say was fueled by deceptive marketing. They’re now seeking over $500 million in damages under the FTC Act and “little FTC Acts” in states from Illinois to Pennsylvania.
2. Dubreu v. Celsius Holdings, Inc. et al. (C.D. Cal., Jan. 22, 2025)
Weeks earlier in California, energy-drink maker Celsius and influencers Devon Barbara (aka Devon Windsor) and Emily Tanner faced a proposed nationwide class action. The claims mirror the Shein case:
- Posts looked like genuine, unpaid endorsements but in fact were paid promotions.
- Any disclosures were “buried” or hard to spot, making it nearly impossible for followers to tell.
- The lead plaintiff says she wouldn’t have paid as much—or bought at all—had she known the posts were sponsored.
This lawsuit seeks at least $450 million under the FTC Act and California’s Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law, and Consumers Legal Remedies Act.
3. Negreanu v. Revolve Group, et. al., No. 2:25-cv-03186 (C.D. Cal.) Revolve Faces Class Action for “Hidden” Sponsorships
A plaintiff in California sued fashion retailer Revolve for more than $50 million, accusing the brand—and its influencers, including Cindy Mello, Tika Camaj, and Nienke Jansz—of hiding paid relationships behind everyday style snaps.
- No “#ad,” no mercy: The complaint argues that Instagram posts tagging @revolve without a clear “paid partnership” disclosure misled shoppers into thinking recommendations were genuine.
- Price-premium theory: Ligia Negreanu, the lead plaintiff, says she paid extra for Revolve items because she believed influencers truly loved the clothes. Now she’s seeking restitution under federal and state consumer-protection laws from California to Florida and beyond.
This lawsuit underscores the growing trend: private plaintriffs are using the same disclosure rules that the FTC enforces to bring brands to court. This means that instead of only having the FTC policing brands, private plaintriffs can go to court and hold brands accountable if influencers don’t clearly disclose their content.
Skims’ Close Call with the NAD
Another interesting case is Skims case involving A-list celebrity Lana Del Rey. The National Advertising Division (NAD) turned its spotlight on SKIMS Body, Inc. (Skims), questioning whether paid ambassadors Brittany Mahomes and Lana Del Rey were upfront about their ties with the brand when they shared Skims pieces on social media.
- The tagging issue: Skims argued that none of the posts explicitly mentioned “Skims” in the captions, so they couldn’t reasonably be seen as endorsements. NAD disagreed. Even though the brand wasn’t named in the text, it was tagged in the image—and that tag alone, NAD said, is enough to trigger the FTC’s requirement that paid partnerships should be disclosed.
- The “fashion shoot” defense: Skims also claimed the images were so stylized and obviously professional that any viewer would know they were sponsored. NAD wasn’t convinced. To the panel, the photos looked like influencer selfies with a glam squad—and if that weren’t enough of a clue, the tags sealed the deal.
In the end, Skims agreed to pull down or update the posts, and the inquiry wrapped up and Skims not geting hit by a fine. But the message is clear: if your ambassadors tag you, they endorse you.
What can you take from this
These cases demonstrate that a simple tag or a high-gloss photo won’t be sufficient as disclosure requirements. When an influencer tags your brand, that act alone makes the post an endorsement—and under FTC rules, endorsements must carry clear, conspicuous disclosures. Likewise, no amount of professional styling can substitute for plain language: “#ad,” “#sponsored,” or the platform’s native paid-partnership banner belongs front and center, not buried behind hashtags or hidden under “read more.”
What is interesting is that enforcement is no longer limited to the FTC. With class action lawsuits seeking hundreds of millions in damages now multiplying, private plaintiffs’ lawyers are targeting brands directly. In other words, if an influencer missteps, it’s your company, agency, or in-house marketing team that carries the ultimate liability. Therefore, adhering to social media advertising guidelines is essential. You must clearly communicate disclosure requirements to your influencers and enforce them consistently to avoid penalties, costly litigation, and damage to consumer trust. Given that consumers engage with social media daily, they naturally assume that endorsements from their favourite influencers and leading brands are honest and accurate—especially when a new “must-have” product is promoted.
Mitigating these risks is simple when approached proactively. Start by auditing every influencer post before it goes live, so missing disclosures are caught in real time. At the same time, embed clear disclosure clauses in your influencer agreements—require “#ad” or the platform’s paid-partnership label at the very top of each caption and reserve the right to pause payments if disclosures are missing. Complement these contractual safeguards with focused training sessions for your influencers and managers. Finally, treat disclosure policy as a living document, reviewing it quarterly to stay aligned with evolving platform features and the latest FTC guidance.
At the end of the day, beautiful content may drive engagement, but it is the transparent partnerships that protect your bottom line and gain consumer trust. Give clear labels the prominence they deserve, and you’ll be far better positioned to stay out of court.
.webp)
.webp)
