Nike Email Lawsuit: "Fake Urgency" Alleged in Promo Messages

Case Overview: A class action alleges Nike uses misleading "false urgency" and deceptive subject lines in promotional emails, violating Washington's Commercial Electronic Mail Act (CEMA).

Consumers Affected: Washington residents who received commercial emails from Nike with allegedly false or misleading subject lines.

Court: Superior Court of the State of Washington, King County

Nike is facing a proposed class action lawsuit in Washington state over claims that its marketing emails mislead consumers with false urgency and deceptive subject lines, allegedly violating a state law designed to combat spam and digital harassment.

The lawsuit accuses Nike of routinely flooding customers' inboxes with commercial emails containing subject lines like “Only a few hours left” or “Ends tonight,” even when the underlying offers were extended days or weeks beyond the implied deadlines. 

According to the complaint, these misleading time-limited claims are a form of psychological pressure that distorts consumer decision-making and violates the Washington Commercial Electronic Mail Act (CEMA), which prohibits false or misleading subject lines in marketing emails sent to residents of the state.

"False Scarcity" Tactics Violate State Law, Plaintiff Claims

The complaint was filed by Harrison Ma, a King County resident who says he was personally targeted by Nike’s email blitz in late 2024. He alleges the subject lines of multiple messages he received during Nike’s Black Friday and Cyber Monday promotions falsely conveyed that time was running out to take advantage of sales, when in reality, Nike continued the deals well past the dates implied.

In one instance, Nike advertised a 60% off Black Friday sale ending November 30. The next day, it rebranded the same offer as a Cyber Monday deal and extended it for another week. This pattern allegedly continued for nearly a month, with subject lines such as “Cyber Monday continues” and “Jump on these deals” masking the fact that the discount campaign had been ongoing all along.

Washington's CEMA Law Aims to Stop Deceptive Email Subject Lines

The lawsuit describes these tactics as part of a broader digital marketing strategy known as “false time scarcity,” where companies use language that creates urgency without a real deadline. 

According to studies cited in the complaint, such messages exploit human psychology—consumers are more likely to act under perceived time pressure, even if the deadline is fabricated. Regulators have taken note of this trend, and the Federal Trade Commission has previously flagged these “false limited time” messages as harmful “dark patterns” that manipulate shoppers and diminish trust in digital marketing. 

Washington’s CEMA law aims to address precisely this type of conduct, imposing strict requirements for truth in email subject lines regardless of whether a consumer actually believed or acted on them. The lawsuit points out that Nike, given its vast marketing infrastructure and tools like Salesforce Marketing Cloud, likely has ample means to determine the location of its email recipients and should know when it is targeting Washington residents.

Other Brands Face Lawsuits Over Aggressive Marketing

Nike is not the only major brand facing scrutiny for how it communicates with consumers. Crumbl Cookies is currently being sued over claims it sent promotional text messages to customers who had opted out—allegedly ignoring their requests to stop. 

Similarly, Kim Kardashian’s Skims brand is accused of sending unsolicited marketing texts during federally restricted hours. Other tech and retail companies, including Snapchat, Yelp, and Temu, are also battling legal complaints for sending messages to users without consent, often in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

In his lawsuit against Nike, Ma wants to represent anyone in Washington that got an email from Nike. He is suing for violations of the Commercial Electronic Mail Act and is seeking enjoinment, damages, fees, costs, and interest.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Ma v. Nike, Inc.
• Case Number: 25-2-16073-4 KNT
• Court: Superior Court of the State of Washington, King County 

Plaintiffs' Attorneys

• Walter M. Smith (Smith & Dietrich Law Offices, PLLC)
• Lynn A. Toops and Ian R. Bensberg (CohenMalad, LLP)
• J. Gerard Stranch, IV (Stranch, Jennings & Garvey, PLLC)

Have you received promotional emails from Nike with urgent-sounding subject lines? Share your experience below.