New York (VINNEWS/Rabbi Yair Hoffman) Many frum businesses depend on online reviews. A caterer, a sheitel macher, a contractor, or a seforim store can rise or fall on its rating. Since October 21, 2024, federal regulations have governed how those reviews may be obtained. The question for the Torah-observant business owner is whether these rules are binding only as civil law, or whether they also carry halachic force under the principle of dina d’malchusa dina, “the law of the kingdom is the law.”

The Six Laws

The Federal Trade Commission’s rule on consumer reviews appears in Title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 465. Its main requirements are as follows.

• A business may reward customers for writing reviews, but under Section 465.3 of the rule the reward may not depend on whether the review is positive. A discount for an honest review is permitted; a discount for a five-star review is forbidden. Section 465.3 also forbids wording that implies a favorable review is expected, such as “tell us how much you loved your meal.”
• The FTC’s Endorsement Guides, at 16 C.F.R. § 255.5, require that a customer who receives a reward disclose it in the review.
• Section 465.2 prohibits a business from writing reviews under invented names or creating reviews from people who never used the product, including AI-generated reviews. The same section bars buying reviews the business knew or should have known were fake. Hiring a marketing company to do this does not protect the business.
• Section 465.4 allows owners, managers, employees, and their spouses, parents, children, and siblings to review the business only if they clearly disclose the relationship. A business may not ask them for reviews if it should expect the relationship to go undisclosed. Section 465.4 exempts a general request sent to all customers.
• Section 465.6 forbids a business from using baseless legal threats, intimidation, or false accusations to suppress negative reviews. Section 465.5 forbids a business from creating a supposedly independent review site that it secretly controls.
• Section 5(m)(1)(A) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(m)(1)(A), violations can result in civil penalties of more than $50,000 per violation.

The Principle of Dina D’Malchusa Dina

Shmuel states the principle in four places in the Gemara: in Nedarim 28a, in Gittin 10b, in Bava Kamma 113a, and in Bava Basra 54b. The Rishonim offer several explanations for why secular law binds a Jew.

The Rashbam, in his commentary on Bava Basra 54b (s.v. v’ha’amar Shmuel), explains that the residents of a country willingly accept the king’s laws. Those laws therefore have the force of an agreement among the people. The Rambam, in Hilchos Gezeilah V’Aveidah 5:18, gives a similar reason. The people of the land have accepted the king as their ruler and agreed to be his subjects, and so his laws bind them. The Ran, commenting on Nedarim 28a, offers another reason: the land belongs to the king, and he may set conditions for those who live in it.

The Rambam, in Hilchos Gezeilah V’Aveidah 5:14, also sets an important condition. A law is valid as dina d’malchusa only if it applies equally to all citizens. A decree aimed at one person or one group is not law but robbery. The Shulchan Aruch codifies this in Choshen Mishpat 369:8.

The Poskim disagree about how far the principle extends. The Rema, in Choshen Mishpat 369:11, cites one view limiting dina d’malchusa to matters of the government’s own interest, such as taxes. He then cites a broader view that includes laws the government enacts for the benefit of the people of the country. The Shach, in Choshen Mishpat 73:39, adds a significant limit. Dina d’malchusa does not override the Torah’s own monetary laws in disputes between Jews; otherwise all of Choshen Mishpat would be replaced.

The practical rule that emerges is this. Government regulations that apply to everyone, serve the public good, and do not contradict a specific Torah law are binding under dina d’malchusa.

Dina D’Malchusa in Kinyanim and Commerce

The principle has always applied to commerce and acquisitions. The Mishnah in Gittin 10b validates documents of sale and debt issued by non-Jewish courts, and the Gemara there explains that the reason is dina d’malchusa dina. Similarly, the Gemara in Bava Basra 54b–55a discusses the Persian law that land is acquired only by deed, and Shmuel applies his principle there as well.

A related concept is situmta, the merchants’ mark. The Gemara in Bava Metzia 74a rules that where merchants customarily complete a sale with such a mark, the sale is binding. Commercial custom can thus create a valid kinyan. The Chasam Sofer, in his Teshuvos on Choshen Mishpat, siman 66, discusses how this principle of commercial custom extends to the established practices of the marketplace.

The regulation of commerce is therefore not at the edges of dina d’malchusa. It is at its center. The government sets the rules by which buying and selling take place, and halacha recognizes those rules.

Application to the Review Rules

The FTC rules would seem to fall squarely within dina d’malchusa. They meet every condition the Poskim set.

They regulate commerce. A review is written to persuade a future buyer to make a purchase. Rules governing reviews are rules governing the sale itself, the very area where Shmuel’s principle is most firmly established in Gittin 10b and Bava Basra 54b.

They apply equally to everyone. The rules bind every business in the country, Jewish or not, large or small. This satisfies the condition the Rambam sets in Hilchos Gezeilah 5:14 and the Shulchan Aruch in Choshen Mishpat 369:8.

They benefit the public. Consumer protection is a clear example of a law enacted “for the benefit of the people of the country,” in the language of the broader view cited by the Rema in Choshen Mishpat 369:11. Even under the narrower view the Rema cites, it is hard to argue that a rule protecting every buyer from deception is a private matter.

They do not conflict with Torah law. The limitation of the Shach in Choshen Mishpat 73:39 does not apply here, because the Torah itself prohibits the conduct these rules forbid. The Gemara in Chullin 94a prohibits geneivas da’as, creating a false impression in another person’s mind, and applies this to non-Jews as well as Jews. The Rambam, in Hilchos Mechirah 18:1, rules that it is forbidden to deceive people in buying and selling, and the Shulchan Aruch codifies this in Choshen Mishpat 228:6. The Torah also commands in Shemos 23:7, “Midvar sheker tirchak,” “Distance yourself from falsehood.” The Tosefta in Bava Kamma 7:3 lists goneiv da’as habriyos, one who deceives people, as the first of seven kinds of thieves.

Each scenario in the federal rule therefore carries a double prohibition. Paying for a five-star review, which Section 465.3 forbids, creates a false impression that the rating reflects free opinion. Posting fictitious reviews, which Section 465.2 forbids, is outright sheker. An employee’s wife praising her husband’s business without disclosure, which Section 465.4 addresses, misleads the reader about her impartiality. Halacha forbids all of these on its own terms. Dina d’malchusa adds a second, independent obligation to obey the law of the land.

There is a further consideration. A frum business caught buying fake reviews, with penalties reported in the news, creates a chillul Hashem. The Gemara in Yoma 86a teaches that a person who studies Torah and deals honestly in business sanctifies Hashem’s Name, and that one who does the opposite brings about the reverse.

Conclusion

The FTC’s review rules regulate commercial transactions, apply to all citizens equally, serve the public, and reinforce rather than contradict the Torah’s own prohibitions on deception. By the criteria of Shmuel, the Rashbam, the Rambam, the Shulchan Aruch, and the Rema, they would seem to be binding as dina d’malchusa dina. The practical guidance is simple. Ask every customer for an honest review. Never tie a reward to praise. Never buy reviews in bulk. Make sure relatives and employees disclose who they are. Specific questions should be brought to one’s own Rav.

The author can be reached at [email protected]