5 Written questions
5 Matching questions
- Consumer Products Safety Act
- Consumer Redress
- Children's Advertising Review Unit (CARU)
- a In 1974 it added onto NAD/NARB, unit tasked with focusing only on children's advertising (Kellogs and Matel chipped in to help form it). It was small but fairly effective
- b Some judges weren't happy with how Section 13B only issued a temporary injunction. So judges decided that they were going to order advertisers to pay money back to the consumers. This was a real threat to consumers and opened up new opportunities for the FTC. It was also only supposed to be for the worst cases but the FTC finds many cases to be the worst.
- c If you make a claim that endangers someone's safety these act can regulate.
- d Harder to prove. The FTC must prove that there is a difference b/t the conveyed message and the product attributes
- e If the ad says "the color is blue". In this case the FTC has to look at the message and assume that the conveyed meaning and literal message are identical.
5 Multiple choice questions
- Used a tv demonstration that highlighted the super moisturizing abilities of Rapid-Shave. Showed the razor shaving a sheet of sandpaper but the problem was that is was actually plexiglas not sandpaper. The FTC say this as deceptive because it showed fake proof. This case went all the way to the SC who upheld the decision but it lead to disclaimers in advertisements
- 1. (1970) Immoral, unethical, oppressive or unscrupulous conduct. Problem was that it was very broad. An example is Arthur Murray Dance Studio (overreaching)
2. (1980) Unfairness Policy - Deception is a small circle that is in unfairness. The problem was that the SC said that unfairness did not include deception. Deception was just the possibility to get hurt where as unfairness someone actually had to be harmed for the FTC to take action under this definition. Example - the Harvester tractors
3. (1994) "causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers, not reasonably-avoidable by consumers and not out weighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to competition."
- 1. Honor/reputation
2. bootstrapping (pulling yourself up by others' bootstraps)
4. Consumers, not advertisers should decide which brand is better
5. incomplete picture
6. destructive to a specific market
7. reduce credibility of advertising
8. meaningful comparison is impossible
9. consumer confusion
10. help enemy
- A law that in large part does what the FTC does, but on the state level. 1960s: Nader & American Bar Association (ABA) claimed that FTC did a lousy job of protecting consumers. FTC claimed they did not have enough power so "little FTC act" was created at the state level.
- Can regulate what claims are made about credit in advertising
5 True/False questions
Clairol Case → The FTC went too far in this case. ______ was charged with deceptive advertising for selling permanent hair color. The FTC thought that the word permanent would mislead women into thinking that it would color hair that hadn't grown out yet. A woman testified about the third person effect of this. People complained and said that the FTC had gone too far to protect ignoramuses. Help lead to the reasonable man standard.
Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (TDTPA) → This is a state regulation ("little FTC Act"). The main provision: "False, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful." The minor Provisions: You can't use the state seal and state flag when selling a product, because it doesn't want to look as if the state endorsed the product
-List of examples (not an exhaustive list): Passing off, confusion as to the source, misrepresentation as to the origin, pyramid schemes, turning back odometers when selling cars, etc.
-Consumers can sue and ask for punitive damages (2x), and can get both the court fees and the attorney fees back if you win
-States were encouraged to create their own trade practices by the FTC in the 80s
-This act is like the FTC act b/c it protects against deceptive advertising but this act d/n protect against unfairness and this act allows consumers to sue.
How is the Lanham Act different from the FTC Act → The Lanham Act allows competitors to sue, the FTC is only the government. Also this act allows punitive damages. You can sue for 3x damages, meaning that you can earn 3x what you lost on the competitors infringement on your trademark. You can also sue the competitor for the profits they made.
Capacity → If the ad says "the color is blue". In this case the FTC has to look at the message and assume that the conveyed meaning and literal message are identical.
Consent Orders → Order advertisers to pay back money to consumers. It gives the FTC real power. The FTC is supposed to only use in the worst cases, but has found many worst cases.