A landmark decision handed down by the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit on July 14, 2026, has fundamentally altered the legal landscape for digital marketing and corporate communications. In the case of KetoNatural Pet Foods, Inc. v. Hill’s Pet Nutrition, Inc. (No. 24-3185), the appellate court ruled that hyperlinks embedded on a company’s website can effectively transform third-party content into the company’s own commercial speech. This interpretation carries significant weight under the Lanham Act, particularly regarding false advertising claims, and signals a shift in how courts view the digital "pathway" of consumer information.
The Core of the Dispute
The litigation arose from a competitive dispute within the pet nutrition industry. KetoNatural Pet Foods, Inc. brought suit against Hill’s Pet Nutrition, Inc., alleging that Hill’s engaged in false advertising. The crux of the plaintiff’s argument was not necessarily the primary text on the Hill’s website, but rather the content found at the destination of specific hyperlinks provided by Hill’s.
KetoNatural argued that by curating and linking to specific third-party scientific studies and articles, Hill’s was effectively adopting those materials as its own promotional claims. The Tenth Circuit agreed with this assessment, finding that when a business intentionally directs consumers to external content to bolster a marketing message, that content loses its status as independent third-party information. Instead, it becomes an extension of the company’s own commercial speech, subject to the same rigorous legal standards and liability as a direct advertisement.
A Chronology of Digital Liability
To understand the weight of the Tenth Circuit’s decision, one must look at the evolution of online liability. For decades, the "passive" nature of the internet offered a degree of insulation for companies linking to external sources. Under the traditional interpretation of Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, advertisers were primarily responsible for the text and images they drafted themselves.
- 1990s–2010s: The era of "linking as a reference." Courts generally viewed hyperlinks as mere navigational tools, similar to a footnote in a print publication. Liability for the content at the end of a link was rare, provided the site did not explicitly endorse the content.
- 2020–2024: The rise of sophisticated digital marketing ecosystems. Regulators, including the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), began scrutinizing the "entire consumer journey." The focus shifted from what a company said to what a company led a consumer to believe.
- 2025: Increasing litigation regarding "implied claims." Courts began questioning whether a company could evade liability for false health or performance claims simply by directing users to a third party to make those claims on their behalf.
- July 14, 2026: The Tenth Circuit’s ruling in KetoNatural v. Hill’s cements the concept of "intentional incorporation," effectively ending the era of passive linking for commercial entities.
The Legal Framework: Why This Matters
The Lanham Act, the primary federal trademark and false advertising statute in the United States, prohibits any person from using in commerce any word, term, name, or symbol that is likely to cause confusion or misrepresents the nature, characteristics, or qualities of their own or another person’s goods.
By ruling that hyperlinks can constitute commercial speech, the court has effectively widened the scope of what constitutes an "advertisement." If a company’s marketing team selects a third-party study to prove a product’s efficacy, and that study contains inaccuracies or is misleading, the company—not just the author of the study—now faces direct liability. This is particularly relevant in industries governed by strict regulatory standards, such as pharmaceuticals, supplements, pet food, and finance.
Regulatory Implications and the FTC
The Federal Trade Commission has long maintained that "the truth" of an advertisement is not limited to the headline. In recent years, the FTC has aggressively pursued "deceptive door" practices, where consumers are led through a series of links to reach a misleading conclusion.
The Tenth Circuit’s decision provides a roadmap for federal and state regulators to pursue enforcement actions. Attorneys General, often acting as the primary enforcement arm for state consumer protection laws, are expected to utilize this precedent to investigate "promotional chains." If a brand uses a network of influencers, third-party blogs, and curated research to support a claim, the entire network may now be treated as a single, integrated promotional campaign.
Expert Perspectives on Corporate Strategy
Richard B. Newman, a nationally recognized advertising practices and FTC defense attorney at Hinch Newman LLP, notes that this ruling mandates a total audit of digital assets. "Companies have historically treated hyperlinks as ‘off-site’ and therefore beyond their direct responsibility," Newman explains. "This decision makes it clear that the court views the user’s path as a cohesive whole. If you are pointing a customer to a piece of content, you are essentially adopting that content as your own."
Legal experts suggest that the "intent" behind the link is the deciding factor. If a company embeds a link to an objective, neutral news source for general reference, the liability risk remains low. However, if a link is placed strategically to support a product claim, the content at the destination is now effectively a piece of the company’s marketing copy.
The Impact of Generative AI
The ruling arrives at a critical juncture in the adoption of generative AI in marketing. AI-driven content generation often automates the process of finding and citing "supporting evidence" for marketing claims. If an AI agent automatically pulls a link to a third-party study to validate a company’s product, and that link contains false information, the company may be held responsible for the AI’s selection process.
This creates a new tier of risk: the "automated endorsement." Businesses will need to implement rigorous oversight for AI tools, ensuring that the content being hyperlinked meets the same legal standards for truthfulness as human-written copy.
Strategic Takeaways for Businesses
In light of the KetoNatural ruling, businesses are advised to undertake the following steps:
- Hyperlink Audits: Legal and marketing teams should conduct comprehensive reviews of all outbound links on corporate websites. Identify any link that is used to support a performance or health claim.
- Vetting Third-Party Content: If a link is deemed necessary for promotional purposes, the destination content must be vetted with the same intensity as the primary website copy. If the third-party site updates its content, the linking company must have systems in place to monitor those changes.
- Clear Disclaimers: While disclaimers do not provide blanket immunity, they may help clarify the company’s relationship to the destination content. However, courts are increasingly skeptical of disclaimers that attempt to hide deceptive practices.
- Compliance Counsel: Engaging with legal counsel experienced in FTC compliance is no longer optional for digital-first brands. Ensuring that every step of the consumer’s "click-path" is defensible under the Lanham Act is now a baseline requirement for market participation.
Conclusion
The Tenth Circuit’s decision in KetoNatural Pet Foods, Inc. v. Hill’s Pet Nutrition, Inc. marks the end of a long-standing assumption that digital links are independent of the site that hosts them. By confirming that hyperlinked content can be considered commercial speech, the court has placed the burden of proof firmly on the shoulders of the company directing the traffic. In a digital ecosystem where information flows freely, this ruling serves as a stark reminder: in the eyes of the law, where you send your customers is just as important as what you say to them.
