The Federal Trade Commission has recently focused its consumer protection efforts on the mobile arena, and particularly video game companies operating in that arena.
Last week, the FTC approved amendments to the regulations under the Fur Products Labeling Act, which update the Fur Products Name Guide, incorporate provisions of the 2010 Truth in Fur Labeling Act, and harmonize the regulations’ guaranty provisions with those in the Textile Labeling Rules.
As a country we are quickly approaching a time in which most adults will be disqualified from being elected to public office because of something they posted on their social media account while growing up.
Snap Judgment: FTC Alleges Snapchat Did Not Keep Its Privacy and Security Promises, but Suggests Broad New Duty in the Process
Snapchat’s recent settlement with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) generally provides a comprehensive but not groundbreaking roadmap to the FTC’s privacy and data security expectations in the mobile environment under Section 5 of the FTC Act, with two very notable exceptions.
With summer around the corner, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is reminding publishers, broadcasters, and other media of the ways to spot phony weight-loss claims when screening ads for publication.
Last Thursday, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that messaging app Snapchat agreed to settle charges that it deceived consumers with promises about the disappearing nature of messages sent through the app.
On May 2, 2014, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit requesting that the court reverse the district court’s decision in Lamictal Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litigation, finding that a “no authorized generic” agreement between branded and generic drug makers does not qualify as a “payment,” and is therefore not an antitrust violation.
By now, you have probably heard about the FTC’s recent settlement with Snapchat, the popular mobile photo and video messaging service, over allegations that it deceived consumers with promises about the disappearing nature of messages sent through its service.
Last week, the FTC held its third and final spring privacy seminar on the implications of consumer generated and controlled health data.
Conspicuously absent in the quiver of arrows available to a business looking to take action against someone who has misappropriated or is threatening to misappropriate its trade secrets is a federal cause of action for misappropriation.