enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. FTC fair information practice - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FTC_fair_information_practice

    The FTC identified three types of enforcement measures: self-regulation by the information collectors or an appointed regulatory body; private remedies that give civil causes of action for individuals whose information has been misused to sue violators; and government enforcement that can include civil and criminal penalties levied by the ...

  3. Federal Trade Commission v. Vemma Nutrition Company

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Trade_Commission_v...

    The FTC, under Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act filed for the permanent injunction of Vemma and alleged Vemma in violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C § 45 (a) in connection with the advertising, marketing, promotion, and sale of opportunities to sell health and wellness drinks.

  4. Fashion Originators' Guild of America v. FTC - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fashion_Originators'_Guild...

    FTC, 312 U.S. 457 (1941), is a 1941 decision of the United States Supreme Court sustaining an order of the Federal Trade Commission against a boycott agreement (concerted refusal to deal) among manufacturers of "high-fashion" dresses. The purpose of the boycott was to suppress "style piracy" (unauthorized copying of original dress creations of ...

  5. The Nader Report on the Federal Trade Commission - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nader_Report_on_the...

    The FTC is passive about its duties, is not proactive about discovering violations, delays actions to an unreasonable extent, and has ineffective enforcement practices. The FTC should prioritize problems that have a high area of impact (e.g., many potential victims, particularly vulnerable victims, extraordinary cost to the victims).

  6. United States v. Google Inc. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Google_Inc.

    United States v. Google Inc., No. 3:12-cv-04177 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 16, 2012), is a case in which the United States District Court for the Northern District of California approved a stipulated order for a permanent injunction and a $22.5 million civil penalty judgment, the largest civil penalty the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has ever won in history. [1]

  7. California Unfair Competition Law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Unfair...

    In Raladam, the Court held that a FTC Act Section 5 violation must show actual injury to competition. [6] This ruling prevented individual consumers from suing under the FTC Act. [ 7 ] Following this rationale, California applied the UCL to unfair business practices that affected business competitors, not consumers.

  8. In re TRENDnet, Inc. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_re_TRENDnet,_Inc.

    In the Matter of TRENDnet, Inc., F.T.C. File No. 122-3090, is the first legal action taken by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) against "the marketer of an everyday product with interconnectivity to the Internet and other mobile devices – commonly referred to as the Internet of things."

  9. Axon Enterprise, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axon_Enterprise,_Inc._v...

    The Federal Trade Commission soon began an antitrust investigation into Axon. The company offered to settle, but the FTC declined. In January 2020, Axon filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, challenging the constitutionality of FTC's structure. The district court dismissed the case, holding that ...