Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=887720
 
 

Citations (7)



 
 

Footnotes (292)



 


 



The Best Puffery Article Ever


David A. Hoffman


Temple University - James E. Beasley School of Law; Cultural Cognition Project at Yale Law School


Iowa Law Review, Vol. 91, p. 1395, 2006
Temple University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2006-11

Abstract:     
This Article provides the first extensive legal treatment of an important defense in the law of fraud and contracts: puffery. Legal authorities commonly say they make decisions about whether defendants should be able to utter exaggerated, optimistic, lies based on assumptions about buyer behavior, concluding that consumers do not rely on such speech. However, as the Article shows, such analyses are proxies for a deeper analytical question: does the speech encourage or discourage a type of consumption activity that the court deems welfare maximizing?

The Article presents a novel constitutional analysis of puffery doctrine that focuses on the meaning of misleading speech, a term of art at the heart of the Supreme Court's contested and still evolving commercial speech jurisprudence. Missing from that jurisprudence is a satisfactory account of how consumers and investors react to speech that is not literally false but which has false implications. I present such an account, focused on the incentives and capabilities of sellers to exploit buyers' cognitive vulnerabilities. I draw on economic, marketing, psychology and consumption literatures.

I conclude by offering a novel liability proposal. Because legal authorities are incapable of satisfactorily drawing a line between harmful and innocuous puffery, the law should make sellers presumptively liable if their speech contains exaggerated, but vague boasts. This approach would place the onus on sellers to balance the costs and benefits of puffery, and thus lead both to more satisfying doctrine and a more optimal level of fraud.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 52

Keywords: puffery, behavioral law and economics, advertising, warranty, securities, promissory estoppel, enterprise liability, marketing, consumption, puffing, Lanham Act, fraud, contract

JEL Classification: A1, D1, D18, D78, D8, E2, G18, K1, K2, L15

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: March 7, 2006 ; Last revised: April 6, 2008

Suggested Citation

Hoffman, David A., The Best Puffery Article Ever. Iowa Law Review, Vol. 91, p. 1395, 2006; Temple University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2006-11. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=887720

Contact Information

David A. Hoffman (Contact Author)
Temple University - James E. Beasley School of Law ( email )
1719 N. Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA 19122
United States
215-204-0612 (Phone)
Cultural Cognition Project at Yale Law School
127 Wall St
New Haven, CT 06520
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 17,342
Downloads: 1,628
Download Rank: 4,907
Citations:  7
Footnotes:  292
Paper comments
No comments have been made on this paper

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.531 seconds