The encyclopedia · Advertising & PR · Marketing decision · 2026
Gymshark paid influencers to look unpaid — a lawsuit says that's the whole strategy
A New York class action says Gymshark paid influencers while hiding it, so buyers believed they were seeing genuine preference rather than paid posts.
Gymshark · 2026-06-16
What happened
On 16 June 2026, Mihaela Lupea filed a proposed class action against Gymshark USA in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. She said she bought Gymshark leggings after seeing posts from fitness influencers Whitney Simmons, with about 4 million followers, and Annabel Lucinda, with about 3.4 million.
The complaint alleges Gymshark paid hundreds of fitness influencers to promote its products while instructing, or at minimum encouraging, them to skip the paid-promotion disclosures required by the FTC's Endorsement Guides. It frames the company's 'core marketing strategy' as built on the illusion that ordinary people and fitness professionals genuinely preferred the brand, when the preference was purchased.
Lupea claims she would not have bought the products, or would have paid less, had she known the endorsements were paid — bringing the claim under New York's General Business Law §349, which bars deceptive business practices. The case is one of a wider 2025–2026 wave of similar suits against Celsius, Shein, Revolve, Alo Yoga and Beach Bunny over undisclosed influencer marketing.
Why it happened
- Paid promotion reads as organic enthusiasm only if the payment stays hidden, so the strategy depended on influencers not doing the one thing FTC rules require them to do.
- Using influencers with millions of followers multiplied the reach of each undisclosed post, meaning the same disclosure gap that might pass unnoticed once was repeated at scale.
- The same pattern recurring at multiple brands shows it was treated as standard influencer-marketing practice, not an isolated lapse — turning complaints into a litigation wave.
The lesson
An endorsement's value to a buyer depends on knowing whether it was paid for. Skipping the disclosure doesn't remove the payment — it hides the one fact that changes what a viewer believes.
Aftermath
The suit joined a broader run of 2025–2026 consumer class actions targeting the same disclosure gap across retail and fitness brands, pushing marketing and legal teams to treat influencer-agreement disclosure language as enforceable rather than boilerplate.
Sources
- Benesch Law — Influencer Marketing Under Fire: Gymshark Sued In New Class Action As Plaintiffs Target Undisclosed Paid Endorsements
- The Fashion Law — Gymshark Pulled into Growing Influencer Marketing Litigation Wave
spotted an error? The club wants to know.
More like this
Tracksmith told 11,000 Boston finishers 'this isn't a jogging race' — and had to apologize
The North Face replaced Wikipedia photos with its own — and got caught
Lord & Taylor dressed 50 influencers in one dress — and never said it was an ad
Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →
Comments · 0
Sign in to join the comments.