There are explicit legal provisions for "puffery" to cover the Samsung case as being just marketing fluff and not a claim of objective truth. But if you won a contract based on tricking your customer i to thinking your software was easier to use than the competition when it wasn't, yes, I personally would worry about the FTC.

More generally, preventing deceptive trade practices without preventing ordinary marketing is a well-established and well-explored field, it's not like Massachusetts invented it for this case. (And if anything threatens the rule of law, it's saying, "I don't know what the relevant statutes and regulations and caselaw is in this field so I think we shouldn't enforce laws in this field at all.")