FROM: FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
FTC Testifies Before Congressional Subcommittee on Improving Sports Safety
The Federal Trade Commission testified before Congress on actions it has taken to help ensure that concussion protection claims made for football helmets and other sports equipment are truthful and supported by reliable scientific evidence.
Testifying on behalf of the Commission before the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade, Richard Cleland, Assistant Director for Advertising Practices in FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, outlined the agency’s enforcement efforts. The testimony notes that as awareness of the danger of concussions has grown, manufacturers have started making concussion-protection claims for an increasing array of sports-related products.
“Given the dangers that concussions pose for young athletes engaged in sports, it is essential that advertising for products claiming to reduce the risk of this injury be truthful and substantiated,” the testimony states.
The testimony points out that in August 2012 the Commission announced a settlement with the marketers of the Brain-Pad mouth guard. The Commission alleged that Brain-Pad, Inc. and its president lacked a reasonable basis for their claims that Brain-Pad mouth guards reduced the risk of concussions, especially those caused by lower jaw impacts, and that they had falsely claimed that scientific studies proved that those mouth guards did so. The order in that case prohibits these and other deceptive claims.
In November 2012, after the order in the Brain-Pad case became final, the Commission staff sent out warning letters to 18 other manufacturers of sports equipment, advising them of the Brain-Pad settlement and warning them that they might be making deceptive concussion protection claims for their products, according to the testimony.
The Commission staff also investigated concussion risk reduction claims made by three major manufacturers of football helmets: Riddell Sports Group, Inc., Schutt Sports Inc., and Xenith, LLC. The staff closed the investigations without taking formal action. All three companies discontinued potentially deceptive claims in their advertising, or had agreed to do so, the testimony stated.
The Commission will continue monitoring the market to ensure that advertisers do not mislead consumers about their products’ concussion-protection capabilities, or the science behind them. The Commission’s approach will be balanced, to avoid inadvertently chilling research or impeding development of new technologies and products that truly do provide concussion protection, the testimony concluded.
The Commission vote approving the testimony and its inclusion in the formal record was 4-0.
The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.
Showing posts with label ADVERTISING. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ADVERTISING. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 18, 2014
Monday, December 9, 2013
APP DEVELOPER CHARGED BY FTC WITH DECEIVING CONSUMERS REGARDING SHARING OF INFO
FROM: FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
Android Flashlight App Developer Settles FTC Charges It Deceived Consumers
'Brightest Flashlight' App Shared Users' Location, Device ID Without Consumers' Knowledge.
The creator of one of the most popular apps for Android mobile devices has agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that the free app, which allows a device to be used as a flashlight, deceived consumers about how their geolocation information would be shared with advertising networks and other third parties.
Goldenshores Technologies, LLC, managed by Erik M. Geidl, is the company behind the “Brightest Flashlight Free” app, which has been downloaded tens of millions of times by users of the Android operating system. The FTC’s complaint alleges that the company’s privacy policy deceptively failed to disclose that the app transmitted users’ precise location and unique device identifier to third parties, including advertising networks. In addition, the complaint alleges that the company deceived consumers by presenting them with an option to not share their information, even though it was shared automatically rendering the option meaningless.
“When consumers are given a real, informed choice, they can decide for themselves whether the benefit of a service is worth the information they must share to use it,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “But this flashlight app left them in the dark about how their information was going to be used.”
In its complaint, the FTC alleges that Goldenshores’ privacy policy told consumers that any information collected by the Brightest Flashlight app would be used by the company, and listed some categories of information that it might collect. The policy, however, did not mention that the information would also be sent to third parties, such as advertising networks.
Consumers also were presented with a false choice when they downloaded the app, according to the complaint. Upon first opening the app, they were shown the company’s End User License Agreement, which included information on data collection. At the bottom of the license agreement, consumers could click to “Accept” or “Refuse” the terms of the agreement. Even before a consumer had a chance to accept those terms, though, the application was already collecting and sending information to third parties – including location and the unique device identifier.
The settlement with the FTC prohibits the defendants from misrepresenting how consumers’ information is collected and shared and how much control consumers have over the way their information is used. The settlement also requires the defendants to provide a just-in-time disclosure that fully informs consumers when, how, and why their geolocation information is being collected, used and shared, and requires defendants to obtain consumers’ affirmative express consent before doing so.
The defendants also will be required to delete any personal information collected from consumers through the Brightest Flashlight app.
The Commission vote to accept the consent agreement package containing the proposed consent order for public comment was 4-0.
The FTC will publish a description of the consent agreement package in the Federal Register shortly. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through Jan. 6, 2014, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent order final. Interested parties can submit written comments electronically or in paper form by following the instructions in the “Invitation To Comment” part of the “Supplementary Information” section. Comments can be submitted electronically via the Commission’s comment submission page. Comments in paper form should be mailed or delivered to: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113 (Annex D), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in paper form near the end of the public comment period be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions.
NOTE: The Commission issues an administrative complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $16,000.
Android Flashlight App Developer Settles FTC Charges It Deceived Consumers
'Brightest Flashlight' App Shared Users' Location, Device ID Without Consumers' Knowledge.
The creator of one of the most popular apps for Android mobile devices has agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that the free app, which allows a device to be used as a flashlight, deceived consumers about how their geolocation information would be shared with advertising networks and other third parties.
Goldenshores Technologies, LLC, managed by Erik M. Geidl, is the company behind the “Brightest Flashlight Free” app, which has been downloaded tens of millions of times by users of the Android operating system. The FTC’s complaint alleges that the company’s privacy policy deceptively failed to disclose that the app transmitted users’ precise location and unique device identifier to third parties, including advertising networks. In addition, the complaint alleges that the company deceived consumers by presenting them with an option to not share their information, even though it was shared automatically rendering the option meaningless.
“When consumers are given a real, informed choice, they can decide for themselves whether the benefit of a service is worth the information they must share to use it,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “But this flashlight app left them in the dark about how their information was going to be used.”
In its complaint, the FTC alleges that Goldenshores’ privacy policy told consumers that any information collected by the Brightest Flashlight app would be used by the company, and listed some categories of information that it might collect. The policy, however, did not mention that the information would also be sent to third parties, such as advertising networks.
Consumers also were presented with a false choice when they downloaded the app, according to the complaint. Upon first opening the app, they were shown the company’s End User License Agreement, which included information on data collection. At the bottom of the license agreement, consumers could click to “Accept” or “Refuse” the terms of the agreement. Even before a consumer had a chance to accept those terms, though, the application was already collecting and sending information to third parties – including location and the unique device identifier.
The settlement with the FTC prohibits the defendants from misrepresenting how consumers’ information is collected and shared and how much control consumers have over the way their information is used. The settlement also requires the defendants to provide a just-in-time disclosure that fully informs consumers when, how, and why their geolocation information is being collected, used and shared, and requires defendants to obtain consumers’ affirmative express consent before doing so.
The defendants also will be required to delete any personal information collected from consumers through the Brightest Flashlight app.
The Commission vote to accept the consent agreement package containing the proposed consent order for public comment was 4-0.
The FTC will publish a description of the consent agreement package in the Federal Register shortly. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through Jan. 6, 2014, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent order final. Interested parties can submit written comments electronically or in paper form by following the instructions in the “Invitation To Comment” part of the “Supplementary Information” section. Comments can be submitted electronically via the Commission’s comment submission page. Comments in paper form should be mailed or delivered to: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113 (Annex D), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in paper form near the end of the public comment period be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions.
NOTE: The Commission issues an administrative complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $16,000.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)