Levitz Furniture Refuses To Address Customer Complaint
Consumer Help Web was contacted by a customer who was suffering from an ongoing problem with furniture giant Levitz.
Our customer tells us she purchased a dining room set from Levitz in 2004. She reports within a week or two of the expiration of her warranty the brace support on the bottom of one of the armchairs separated. This happened to another chair a month later. She states she contacted the company immediately after each incident, only to be told the warranty had expired and no assistance would be provided. Our customer tells us she believes there is a manufacturing defect in the chairs and is concerned for the safety of her family and guests.
Consumer Help Web contacted the company's senior management multiple times and was stonewalled. To help our customer, we then arranged for free referrals to a local consumer attorney and the contact information for the government agency responsible for ensuring that Levitz addresses consumers when they have these types of complaints.
Saturday, September 30, 2006
British Lottery Scam Continues As Consumer Help Web Offers Government Assistance
After another victim of the infamous "British Lottery" scam contacted Consumer Help Web, the advocacy company swung into action and began attempting to make contact via presumed letter drops in Canada.
At the heart of this issue was a customer who was not paid funds reportedly promised to her by this "organization".
After another victim of the infamous "British Lottery" scam contacted Consumer Help Web, the advocacy company swung into action and began attempting to make contact via presumed letter drops in Canada.
At the heart of this issue was a customer who was not paid funds reportedly promised to her by this "organization".
Consumer Help Web is well acquainted with this particular series of activities and has contacted regulatory authorities to provide assistance in their quest for regulatory or potentially criminal action.
If you receive notice that you've won something or just need to send funds to another address once funds are deposited in your account, don't do it! The scam is that the funds are deposited, but have not cleared. They typically are returned as having insufficient funds, but by then, the victim has already sent the actual money to the criminals.
Monday, September 25, 2006
St. George, Utah Getting Commercial Airport, Area Now Home To 160,000
Air travelers heading into and out of fast-growing St. George, Utah soon will be able to fly by scheduled jet aircraft now that the federal government is investing $17.2 million to help pay for a new airport for the community, Marion C. Blakey, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), announced today.
The new FAA grant is the largest single federal grant for an airport in Utah. The city will use the initial grant money to buy 277 acres of land for the new airport site, which is approximately five miles from downtown St. George. About 1,300 acres are needed for the airport, and the city plans to acquire the additional land over the next two years.
The new airport will include a new 9,300-foot runway large enough to allow scheduled commercial jet airlines and business jets to fly into St. George for the first time. The airport will be a state-of-the-art facility, which will handle twice as many passengers as the existing airport. The new runway will have the latest in lighting systems and navigation technology.
Scheduled to open in 2011, the new airport will use an approach procedure designed to keep aircraft as high as possible and to the west of Zion National Park in order to lessen the noise impact on the park.
The airport was necessary because St. George was the nation’s fastest-growing metropolitan area from 2000 to 2005 and the community now totals more than 160,000 residents. "This community is growing so fast that it deserves the kind of service many other places have enjoyed for decades," Blakey said.
Air travelers heading into and out of fast-growing St. George, Utah soon will be able to fly by scheduled jet aircraft now that the federal government is investing $17.2 million to help pay for a new airport for the community, Marion C. Blakey, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), announced today.
The new FAA grant is the largest single federal grant for an airport in Utah. The city will use the initial grant money to buy 277 acres of land for the new airport site, which is approximately five miles from downtown St. George. About 1,300 acres are needed for the airport, and the city plans to acquire the additional land over the next two years.
The new airport will include a new 9,300-foot runway large enough to allow scheduled commercial jet airlines and business jets to fly into St. George for the first time. The airport will be a state-of-the-art facility, which will handle twice as many passengers as the existing airport. The new runway will have the latest in lighting systems and navigation technology.
Scheduled to open in 2011, the new airport will use an approach procedure designed to keep aircraft as high as possible and to the west of Zion National Park in order to lessen the noise impact on the park.
The airport was necessary because St. George was the nation’s fastest-growing metropolitan area from 2000 to 2005 and the community now totals more than 160,000 residents. "This community is growing so fast that it deserves the kind of service many other places have enjoyed for decades," Blakey said.
Spinach Update From FDA
Update
To date, 175 cases of illness due to E. coli O157:H7 infection have been reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), including 28 cases of Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS), 93 hospitalizations and one death.
FDA is working closely with CDC and the state of California. FDA has determined that the spinach implicated in the outbreak was grown in three counties: Monterey, San Benito and Santa Clara in California. Spinach grown in the rest of the United States has not been implicated in the current E. coli O157:H7 outbreak. The public can be confident that spinach grown in the non-implicated areas can be consumed.
Consumers are advised not to purchase or consume fresh spinach if they cannot verify that it was grown in areas other than the three California counties implicated in the outbreak.
Other produce grown in these counties is not implicated in this outbreak. Processed spinach (e.g., frozen and canned spinach) is also not implicated in this outbreak.
Industry is working to get spinach from areas not implicated in the current E. coli O157:H7 outbreak back on the market.
Investigators from FDA, CDC and the state of California are working to narrow the area implicated in the current E. coli O157:H7 outbreak even further.
States Affected
The 25 affected states are: Arizona (7), California (1), Colorado (1), Connecticut (3) Idaho (4), Illinois (1), Indiana (9), Kentucky (8), Maine (3), Maryland (3), Michigan (4), Minnesota (2), Nebraska (9), Nevada (1), New Mexico (5), New York (11), Ohio (20), Oregon (6), Pennsylvania (8), Tennessee (1), Utah (18), Virginia (2), Washington (3), Wisconsin (44), and Wyoming (1).
Laboratory Findings
The Utah Department of Health (UDOH) and the Salt Lake Valley Health Department (SLVHD) have confirmed that E. coli O157:H7, the same strain as that associated with the outbreak, has been found in a bag of Dole baby spinach purchased in Utah with a use by date of August 30, 2006. Laboratory tests were conducted by the Utah Public Health Laboratory (UPHL).
The New Mexico Department of Health announced on September 20, 2006, that it had linked a sample from a package of spinach with the outbreak strain of E. coli O157:H7. The spinach was eaten by one of New Mexico's patients before becoming sick. DNA fingerprinting tests determined that the strain from the spinach matches the strain from patients in the outbreak. The package of spinach that tested positive was "Dole Baby Spinach, Best if Used by August 30."
Five (5) Recalls
On September 22, 2006, Pacific Coast Fruit Company of Portland, Oregon initiated a voluntary recall of products that may include spinach supplied by Natural Selections Foods. Pacific Coast Fruit Company stopped making all products with spinach supplied from California on September 14, 2006. The recalled products are:
Baby Spring Mix Salad Kit (4.6 lbs), Chef on the Run- Bacon Spinach Salad (9 oz. plus 2 fl. oz. dressing), Chef on the Run - Spring Greens Salad (5 oz. plus 2 fl. oz. dressing), Chef on the Run - Willamette Valley Salad (10 oz. plus 2 fl. oz. dressing),Trader Joe's - Baby Spinach and Greens with Bleu Cheese, Candied Pecans and Cranberries with Raspberry Vinaigrette Dressing (10 oz.), Trader Joe's - Baby Greens and Spinach Salad with Wild Maine Blueberry Dressing (10 oz.), Mediterranean Veggie Blend Kit - 15 lbs, and My Brothers Pizza Spinach and Garlic - 15 oz. and 36 oz.
Most of the salad products can be identified by the labels Trader Joe's, My Brothers Pizza or Chef on the Run and are in clam shell containers. Pizza products are in round cardboard bottoms with a plastic over wrap. All salad products will have a "USE BY DATE" on or before Sept 20, 2006. Pizza products will have a "USE BY DATE" on or before September 23, 2006.
The products were distributed through various retail outlets in Alaska, Oregon, Washington and Idaho. There is no international distribution.
On September 22, 2006,Triple B Corporation, doing business as S.T. Produce, of Seattle, Washington, initiated a voluntary recall of its fresh spinach salad products with a "Use By" date of 8/22/2006 thru 9/20/2006. Spinach used in these products may have been supplied from Natural Selections Foods of California. The recalled products were distributed in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana to retail stores and delis and sold in a hard plastic clamshell container.
The products recalled by S.T. Produce are: NWG Spinach Salad (5 oz.),Spinach Salad, QFC (5 oz.), Charlie's Spinach Salad (5 oz.), Charlie's Tabouli & Goat Cheese Salad (10 oz.), NWG Tabouli & Goat Cheese Salad (10 oz.),Tabouli & Goat Cheese Salad, QFC (10 oz.), T/H Spring Mix Salad (5.5 oz.), T/H Mozzarella Spring Mix Salad (5.5 oz.), T/H Baby Spinach Salad (5.5 oz.), Walnut and Blue Cheese Salad w/ Grilled Chicken Breast (6.5 oz.), Larry's Market Tabouli & Goat Cheese Salad (10 oz.), Charlie's Seasonal Greens Salad (2.5 oz.), Charlie's Seasonal Greens Salad (4 oz.), Charlie's Baby Spinach Salad (6 oz.), Charlie's Baby Spinach Salad (5 oz.) and Caesar Bowtie Noodle Salad Kit with Grilled Chicken Breast (6.9 lbs).
On September 19, 2006, RLB Food Distributors, L.P., West Caldwell, NJ, initiated a voluntary recall of certain salad products that may contain spinach with an 'Enjoy Thru' date of 9/20/06. See: http://www.fda.gov/oc/po/firmrecalls/rlb09_06.html. The products recalled by RLB are: Balducci's Mesclun Mix 5 oz., Balducci's Organic Baby Spinach 5 oz., Balducci's Mixed Greens 5 oz., FreshPro Mesclun Mix 5 oz., FreshPro Organic Baby Spinach 5 oz., FreshPro Mixed Greens 5 oz., FreshPro Salad Mix with Italian Dressing 4.75 oz., and FreshPro Salad Mix with Ranch Dressing 5.25 oz.
On September 17, 2006, River Ranch, of Salinas, California, announced a voluntary recall of packages of spring mix containing spinach. River Ranch obtained bulk spring mix containing spinach from Natural Selections. The following brands are involved: Fresh N' Easy Spring Mix and Hy-Vee Spring mix containing baby spinach, distributed to retailers in Texas, Iowa, New Mexico, Georgia and Ohio. Product was packed in 5 oz. bags and 5 oz. plastic trays. Products that do not contain spinach are not part of this recall.
On September 15, 2006, Natural Selection Foods, LLC, of San Juan Bautista, California, announced a voluntary recall of all products containing spinach in all brands they pack with "Best if Used by Dates" of August 17, 2006 through October 1, 2006. These products include spinach and any salad with spinach in a blend, both retail and food service products. Products that do not contain spinach are not part of this recall.
Natural Selection Foods, LLC brands include: Natural Selection Foods, Pride of San Juan, Earthbound Farm, Bellissima, Dole, Rave Spinach, Emeril, Sysco, O Organic, Fresh Point, River Ranch, Superior, Nature's Basket, Pro-Mark, Compliments, Trader Joe's, Ready Pac, Jansal Valley, Cheney Brothers, D'Arrigo Brothers, Green Harvest, Mann, Mills Family Farm, Premium Fresh, Snoboy, The Farmer's Market, Tanimura & Antle, President's Choice, Cross Valley, and Riverside Farms.
The affected products were also distributed to Canada, Mexico, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Iceland. No illnesses have been reported from these countries. FDA continues to investigate whether other companies and brands are involved.
Symptoms of E. coli O157:H7 Illness
E. coli O157:H7 causes diarrhea, often with bloody stools. Although most healthy adults can recover completely within a week, some people can develop a form of kidney failure called HUS. HUS is most likely to occur in young children and the elderly. The condition can lead to serious kidney damage and even death.
Lettuce Safety Initiative
The FDA developed the Lettuce Safety Initiative www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/lettsafe.html in response to recurring outbreaks of E. coli O157:H7 in lettuce. As a result of this outbreak, the initiative has been expanded to cover spinach. The primary goals of the initiative are to reduce public health risks by focusing on the product, agents and areas of greatest concern and to alert consumers early and respond rapidly in the event of an outbreak. This initiative is based on the 2004 Produce Safety Action Plan, intended to minimize the incidence of food borne illness associated with the consumption of fresh produce.
FDA continues to work closely with the CDC and state and local agencies to determine the cause and scope of the E. coli 0157:H7 outbreak in spinach. Please check www.fda.gov for updates.
Carfax Adds More Data To Vehicle History Reports
GE Commercial Finance Fleet Services today announced that they will be reporting damage information on their fleet vehicles to Carfax for inclusion on Carfax Vehicle History Reports. GE Commercial Finance Fleet Services maintains thousands of cars throughout North America. Now, individuals purchasing off lease GE Commercial Finance Fleet Services’ vehicles can use this data to better understand a vehicle’s history and help guide a mechanical inspection before buying.
“We’ve been working with Carfax for a few years now to report service information on our fleet vehicles,” said Paul Seger, vice president of asset remarketing for GE Commercial Finance Fleet Services. “Including information we have about vehicles involved in accidents was a natural next step. We encourage anyone buying a used car to use this information to make sure the vehicle has been properly repaired.”
Since 2004, GE Commercial Finance Fleet Services and Carfax have partnered to bring valuable information to used car buyers and sellers. Their partnership led to previous studies showing that disclosure of vehicle history information through Carfax Vehicle History Reports may substantially raise the resale value of wholesale units.
“Buyers of GE fleet vehicles in the wholesale market have just hit the trifecta,” said Larry Gamache, communications director at Carfax. “They now have access to GE’s service information, these new prior damage records and, the bonus, a significant number of these cars will be Carfax One Owner vehicles. They should command a premium in the wholesale market as they’ll have huge curb appeal to consumers in the retail market.”
GE Commercial Finance Fleet Services today announced that they will be reporting damage information on their fleet vehicles to Carfax for inclusion on Carfax Vehicle History Reports. GE Commercial Finance Fleet Services maintains thousands of cars throughout North America. Now, individuals purchasing off lease GE Commercial Finance Fleet Services’ vehicles can use this data to better understand a vehicle’s history and help guide a mechanical inspection before buying.
“We’ve been working with Carfax for a few years now to report service information on our fleet vehicles,” said Paul Seger, vice president of asset remarketing for GE Commercial Finance Fleet Services. “Including information we have about vehicles involved in accidents was a natural next step. We encourage anyone buying a used car to use this information to make sure the vehicle has been properly repaired.”
Since 2004, GE Commercial Finance Fleet Services and Carfax have partnered to bring valuable information to used car buyers and sellers. Their partnership led to previous studies showing that disclosure of vehicle history information through Carfax Vehicle History Reports may substantially raise the resale value of wholesale units.
“Buyers of GE fleet vehicles in the wholesale market have just hit the trifecta,” said Larry Gamache, communications director at Carfax. “They now have access to GE’s service information, these new prior damage records and, the bonus, a significant number of these cars will be Carfax One Owner vehicles. They should command a premium in the wholesale market as they’ll have huge curb appeal to consumers in the retail market.”
Friday, September 22, 2006
Debt Reduction Companies Temporarily Halted By FTC
A federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order against a nationwide operation that claimed it could reduce consumers’ debt by up to 60 percent, leading many people into financial ruin and bankruptcy. The Federal Trade Commission charged five companies, including Homeland Financial Services, National Support Services and Prosper Financial Solutions, and their principals with deceptive and unfair practices in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act.
“These defendants are charged with targeting consumers who were knee deep in debt and luring them with false promises,” said Lydia Parnes, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Consumers should be leery of anyone who says they can eliminate your unsecured debt, or that you can pay it off for pennies on the dollar. Debt negotiation can be very risky.”
According to the FTC’s complaint, the defendants have falsely claimed that, for a non-refundable fee of up to 15 percent of a consumer’s unsecured debt, they could reduce all of their unsecured debts, including credit card balances and medical bills, by as much as 40 to 60 percent. To the extent that the defendants initiate negotiations with creditors, they typically have begun only after a consumer has paid 30 to 40 percent of the fee, which could be up to three months after a consumer has stopped making payments to creditors, as the defendants have advised them to do, the complaint stated. The defendants rarely have negotiated settlements with all of a consumer’s creditors, and even when they have successfully negotiated an account, in many cases, the settlement amount is significantly more than 60 percent of what they owe.
In many instances, the complaint stated, the defendants have not contacted a consumer’s creditors to offer a settlement, and consumers who have stopped making payments have been sued by creditors or debt collectors, resulting in garnishment of their wages, additional interest charged to their account, interest rate increases, and late fees. According to the complaint, many consumers who have enrolled in the defendants’ program have seen their credit rating worsen substantially, and typically within six months of enrolling, most consumers have left the program and have found that their debt has grown as a result of penalties, fees, interest, and other charges.
The FTC charged the defendants with misrepresenting how much they could reduce consumers’ debt; not adequately disclosing the likelihood that consumers would be sued if they took the defendants’ advice and stopped making payments to creditors; not disclosing that consumers’ account balances would grow from interest, interest rate increases, late fees, and other charges; and falsely advising consumers that negative information that appeared on their credit report as a result of participating in the defendants’ program would be removed upon completion of the program.
A federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order against a nationwide operation that claimed it could reduce consumers’ debt by up to 60 percent, leading many people into financial ruin and bankruptcy. The Federal Trade Commission charged five companies, including Homeland Financial Services, National Support Services and Prosper Financial Solutions, and their principals with deceptive and unfair practices in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act.
“These defendants are charged with targeting consumers who were knee deep in debt and luring them with false promises,” said Lydia Parnes, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Consumers should be leery of anyone who says they can eliminate your unsecured debt, or that you can pay it off for pennies on the dollar. Debt negotiation can be very risky.”
According to the FTC’s complaint, the defendants have falsely claimed that, for a non-refundable fee of up to 15 percent of a consumer’s unsecured debt, they could reduce all of their unsecured debts, including credit card balances and medical bills, by as much as 40 to 60 percent. To the extent that the defendants initiate negotiations with creditors, they typically have begun only after a consumer has paid 30 to 40 percent of the fee, which could be up to three months after a consumer has stopped making payments to creditors, as the defendants have advised them to do, the complaint stated. The defendants rarely have negotiated settlements with all of a consumer’s creditors, and even when they have successfully negotiated an account, in many cases, the settlement amount is significantly more than 60 percent of what they owe.
In many instances, the complaint stated, the defendants have not contacted a consumer’s creditors to offer a settlement, and consumers who have stopped making payments have been sued by creditors or debt collectors, resulting in garnishment of their wages, additional interest charged to their account, interest rate increases, and late fees. According to the complaint, many consumers who have enrolled in the defendants’ program have seen their credit rating worsen substantially, and typically within six months of enrolling, most consumers have left the program and have found that their debt has grown as a result of penalties, fees, interest, and other charges.
The FTC charged the defendants with misrepresenting how much they could reduce consumers’ debt; not adequately disclosing the likelihood that consumers would be sued if they took the defendants’ advice and stopped making payments to creditors; not disclosing that consumers’ account balances would grow from interest, interest rate increases, late fees, and other charges; and falsely advising consumers that negative information that appeared on their credit report as a result of participating in the defendants’ program would be removed upon completion of the program.
Playskool Voluntarily Recalls Toy Tool Benches after the Death of Two Toddlers
In cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), Playskool, of Pawtucket, R.I., is voluntarily recalling about 255,000 Team Talkin' Tool Bench toys following the deaths of two young children.
Playskool received reports that a 19-month-old boy from Martinsburg, W.V., and a 2-year-old boy from League City, Texas, suffocated when oversized, plastic toy nails sold with the tool bench toys became forcefully lodged in their throats. Though the toy nails are not considered a small-part, and the toys are intended for children age 3 and older, Playskool is voluntarily conducting a recall as a precaution to prevent additional incidents.
The Team Talkin' Tool Bench™ is a 20-inch tall plastic toy tool bench with an animated red toy saw, a yellow toy drill and a blue toy vice. The toy talks and makes various sound effects, including tool sounds. The product also includes a toy hammer, screwdriver, two 2"-inch plastic screws, two 3-inch plastic nails and pieces to build a small toy plane. The red Playskool logo is on the front of the brown surface of the tool bench.
The toy was sold at Toys R Us, Wal-Mart, Target, KB Toys stores and various other stores nationwide from October 2005 through September 2006 for about $35.
Consumers should immediately take the two toy nails away from children and contact Playskool to get information on returning the nails for a $50 certificate for a Playskool (or its related companies') product.
For additional information, call Playskool at (800) 509-9554 anytime.
In cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), Playskool, of Pawtucket, R.I., is voluntarily recalling about 255,000 Team Talkin' Tool Bench toys following the deaths of two young children.
Playskool received reports that a 19-month-old boy from Martinsburg, W.V., and a 2-year-old boy from League City, Texas, suffocated when oversized, plastic toy nails sold with the tool bench toys became forcefully lodged in their throats. Though the toy nails are not considered a small-part, and the toys are intended for children age 3 and older, Playskool is voluntarily conducting a recall as a precaution to prevent additional incidents.
The Team Talkin' Tool Bench™ is a 20-inch tall plastic toy tool bench with an animated red toy saw, a yellow toy drill and a blue toy vice. The toy talks and makes various sound effects, including tool sounds. The product also includes a toy hammer, screwdriver, two 2"-inch plastic screws, two 3-inch plastic nails and pieces to build a small toy plane. The red Playskool logo is on the front of the brown surface of the tool bench.
The toy was sold at Toys R Us, Wal-Mart, Target, KB Toys stores and various other stores nationwide from October 2005 through September 2006 for about $35.
Consumers should immediately take the two toy nails away from children and contact Playskool to get information on returning the nails for a $50 certificate for a Playskool (or its related companies') product.
For additional information, call Playskool at (800) 509-9554 anytime.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Samsung Exec Pleads Guilty To Price-Fixing On Computer Memory
A San Jose, Calif., executive of Samsung Semiconductor Inc. - the world's largest manufacturer of a common computer component called dynamic random access memory or DRAM - has agreed to plead guilty and to serve jail time for participating in a global conspiracy to fix DRAM prices, the Department of Justice announced.
The charged executive, Thomas Quinn, participated in the price-fixing conspiracy in his capacity as vice president of marketing for memory products at Samsung Semiconductor Inc. Quinn was charged with one-count, alleging participation in an agreement to fix prices of DRAM and to coordinate bids in an auction held by a DRAM purchaser.
Under the plea agreement, which must be approved by the court, Quinn has agreed to serve eight months in prison and to pay a criminal fine of $250,000. In addition, Quinn has agreed to assist the Department in its ongoing investigation.
"Prison time for price-fixers remains the most potent deterrent to illegal cartel activity," said Thomas O. Barnett, Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Department's Antitrust Division. "Today's action sends a clear message: those who engage in price-fixing schemes will be held accountable for their illegal conduct."
Including today's charge, four companies and 13 individuals have been charged and fines totaling more than $731 million have resulted from the Department's DRAM investigation. The $731 million in criminal fines is the second highest total obtained by the Department of Justice in a criminal antitrust investigation into a specific industry.
DRAM is the most commonly used semiconductor memory product, providing high-speed storage and retrieval of electronic information for a wide variety of computer, telecommunication, and consumer electronic products. DRAM is used in personal computers, laptops, workstations, servers, printers, hard disk drives, personal digital assistants (PDAs), modems, mobile phones, telecommunication hubs and routers, digital cameras, video recorders and TVs, digital set top boxes, game consoles, and digital music players. There were approximately $7.7 billion in DRAM sales in the United States in 2004.
According to the one-count felony charge filed today in federal court in San Francisco, Quinn conspired with unnamed employees from other memory makers to fix the prices of DRAM sold to certain original equipment manufacturers from on or about April 1, 2001 to on or about June 15, 2002, and to coordinate bids on a Dec. 5, 2001 Sun Microsystems Inc., auction. The price-fixing scheme directly affected sales to U.S. computer makers Dell Inc., Hewlett-Packard Company, Compaq Computer Corporation, International Business Machines Corporation, Apple Computer Inc., Gateway Inc., and Sun Microsystems Inc., the Department said.
Quinn is charged with carrying out the price-fixing conspiracy by:
- Participating in meetings, conversations, and communications with competitors to discuss the prices of DRAM to be sold to certain customers; and
- Agreeing with competitors to coordinate bids submitted to Sun Microsystems Inc.
Quinn is the fourth Samsung executive to agree to a prison sentence in the DRAM investigation. Three foreign-based Samsung executives, Sun Woo Lee, Young Woo Lee, and Yeongho Kang, have already pleaded guilty and agreed to serve prison terms ranging from seven to eight months and to pay fines of $250,000 each. In addition, four Hynix Semiconductor Inc., executives, Dae Soo Kim, Chae Kyun Chung, Kun Chul Suh, and Choon Yub Choi, were charged with participating in the DRAM price-fixing conspiracy and agreed to plead guilty and serve jail terms ranging from five to eight months and to each pay a $250,000 fine. In December 2004, four Infineon executives, T. Rudd Corwin, Peter Schaefer, Gunter Hefner, and Heinrich Florian, pleaded guilty to the DRAM price-fixing conspiracy. The Infineon employees served jail terms ranging from four to six months and each paid a $250,000 fine.
Also, in December 2003 the Department charged Alfred Censullo, a Regional Sales Manager for Micron Technology Inc., with obstruction of justice. Censullo pleaded guilty and admitted to having withheld and altered documents responsive to a grand jury subpoena served on Micron. Censullo was sentenced to serve six months of home detention.
In total, four companies have been charged with price fixing in the DRAM investigation. Samsung pleaded guilty to the price-fixing conspiracy and was sentenced to pay a $300 million criminal fine in November 2005. Hynix, the world�s second-largest DRAM manufacturer, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to pay a $185 million criminal fine in May 2005. In January 2006, Japanese manufacturer Elpida Memory agreed to plead guilty and pay an $84 million fine. In October 2004, German manufacturer Infineon pleaded guilty and was sentenced to pay a $160 million criminal fine.
A San Jose, Calif., executive of Samsung Semiconductor Inc. - the world's largest manufacturer of a common computer component called dynamic random access memory or DRAM - has agreed to plead guilty and to serve jail time for participating in a global conspiracy to fix DRAM prices, the Department of Justice announced.
The charged executive, Thomas Quinn, participated in the price-fixing conspiracy in his capacity as vice president of marketing for memory products at Samsung Semiconductor Inc. Quinn was charged with one-count, alleging participation in an agreement to fix prices of DRAM and to coordinate bids in an auction held by a DRAM purchaser.
Under the plea agreement, which must be approved by the court, Quinn has agreed to serve eight months in prison and to pay a criminal fine of $250,000. In addition, Quinn has agreed to assist the Department in its ongoing investigation.
"Prison time for price-fixers remains the most potent deterrent to illegal cartel activity," said Thomas O. Barnett, Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Department's Antitrust Division. "Today's action sends a clear message: those who engage in price-fixing schemes will be held accountable for their illegal conduct."
Including today's charge, four companies and 13 individuals have been charged and fines totaling more than $731 million have resulted from the Department's DRAM investigation. The $731 million in criminal fines is the second highest total obtained by the Department of Justice in a criminal antitrust investigation into a specific industry.
DRAM is the most commonly used semiconductor memory product, providing high-speed storage and retrieval of electronic information for a wide variety of computer, telecommunication, and consumer electronic products. DRAM is used in personal computers, laptops, workstations, servers, printers, hard disk drives, personal digital assistants (PDAs), modems, mobile phones, telecommunication hubs and routers, digital cameras, video recorders and TVs, digital set top boxes, game consoles, and digital music players. There were approximately $7.7 billion in DRAM sales in the United States in 2004.
According to the one-count felony charge filed today in federal court in San Francisco, Quinn conspired with unnamed employees from other memory makers to fix the prices of DRAM sold to certain original equipment manufacturers from on or about April 1, 2001 to on or about June 15, 2002, and to coordinate bids on a Dec. 5, 2001 Sun Microsystems Inc., auction. The price-fixing scheme directly affected sales to U.S. computer makers Dell Inc., Hewlett-Packard Company, Compaq Computer Corporation, International Business Machines Corporation, Apple Computer Inc., Gateway Inc., and Sun Microsystems Inc., the Department said.
Quinn is charged with carrying out the price-fixing conspiracy by:
- Participating in meetings, conversations, and communications with competitors to discuss the prices of DRAM to be sold to certain customers; and
- Agreeing with competitors to coordinate bids submitted to Sun Microsystems Inc.
Quinn is the fourth Samsung executive to agree to a prison sentence in the DRAM investigation. Three foreign-based Samsung executives, Sun Woo Lee, Young Woo Lee, and Yeongho Kang, have already pleaded guilty and agreed to serve prison terms ranging from seven to eight months and to pay fines of $250,000 each. In addition, four Hynix Semiconductor Inc., executives, Dae Soo Kim, Chae Kyun Chung, Kun Chul Suh, and Choon Yub Choi, were charged with participating in the DRAM price-fixing conspiracy and agreed to plead guilty and serve jail terms ranging from five to eight months and to each pay a $250,000 fine. In December 2004, four Infineon executives, T. Rudd Corwin, Peter Schaefer, Gunter Hefner, and Heinrich Florian, pleaded guilty to the DRAM price-fixing conspiracy. The Infineon employees served jail terms ranging from four to six months and each paid a $250,000 fine.
Also, in December 2003 the Department charged Alfred Censullo, a Regional Sales Manager for Micron Technology Inc., with obstruction of justice. Censullo pleaded guilty and admitted to having withheld and altered documents responsive to a grand jury subpoena served on Micron. Censullo was sentenced to serve six months of home detention.
In total, four companies have been charged with price fixing in the DRAM investigation. Samsung pleaded guilty to the price-fixing conspiracy and was sentenced to pay a $300 million criminal fine in November 2005. Hynix, the world�s second-largest DRAM manufacturer, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to pay a $185 million criminal fine in May 2005. In January 2006, Japanese manufacturer Elpida Memory agreed to plead guilty and pay an $84 million fine. In October 2004, German manufacturer Infineon pleaded guilty and was sentenced to pay a $160 million criminal fine.
FREE Child Safety DVD
The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children has offered parents a wonderful opportunity by making its Kidz Smart DVD available for free.
The non-profit's site features a quote from Bryan Cranston, the father on the TV show Malcolm in the Middle, who says, "I believe in this cause so much, I made this DVD with my own money. I hope it helps you and your children stay safe in a world that seems to be growing more dangerous every day."
Consumer Help Web has always supported this amazing organization's work, and we urge all parents to watch this video with their children and help keep them safe.
Consumers can order the DVD by clicking this link. And when you're done, why not pass the video along to another family so the word can continue to spread?
The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children has offered parents a wonderful opportunity by making its Kidz Smart DVD available for free.
The non-profit's site features a quote from Bryan Cranston, the father on the TV show Malcolm in the Middle, who says, "I believe in this cause so much, I made this DVD with my own money. I hope it helps you and your children stay safe in a world that seems to be growing more dangerous every day."
Consumer Help Web has always supported this amazing organization's work, and we urge all parents to watch this video with their children and help keep them safe.
Consumers can order the DVD by clicking this link. And when you're done, why not pass the video along to another family so the word can continue to spread?
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Broadband Beats Dial-Up For First Time: Power Study
s the cost of high-speed Internet service declines and connection speeds become more important, high-speed service overtakes dial-up in market share for the first time, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2006 Internet Service Provider (ISP) Residential Customer Satisfaction StudySM released today.
The study finds that 56 percent of residential ISP customers subscribe to high-speed Internet service—an increase of 11 percentage points from 2005. Correspondingly, market share of dial-up service has dropped from 55 percent in 2005 to 44 percent in 2006. This trend is expected to continue, as the intent to switch service providers among dial-up customers has increased by 3 percentage points from 2005 to 21 percent in 2006, while switching intent among high-speed customers has essentially remained flat since 2003 at 11 percent.
The average amount subscribers report spending per month for high-speed Internet service has steadily decreased since 2004—down by $1.99 to $42.13 in 2006. During the same time period, the average amount dial-up service subscribers report spending has also declined; however, the drop is less significant—falling $0.69 from 2004 to $18.45 per month in 2006.
“Although high-speed Internet service is still considerably more expensive than dial-up, bundling high-speed with other products, such as telephone and video service, has made it an increasingly attractive option for many customers,” said Steve Kirkeby, executive director of telecommunications and technology research at J.D. Power and Associates. “This is not to say that dial-up services are completely out of the picture, as dial-up still holds a significant portion of the market. More specifically, customers are often willing to pay more for faster Internet speeds, provided they are getting other services for less. Our research shows that customers are increasingly expecting offerings and incentives that recognize their loyalty, and high-speed Internet is a critical piece of the most attractive bundled offers.”
The study, now in its ninth year, measures customer satisfaction with high-speed and dial-up Internet service providers based on seven factors. They are: performance and reliability; cost of service; image; customer service/technical support; billing; e-mail services; and offerings and promotions.
Included in the study for the first time, WideOpenWest! (WOW!) ranks highest in satisfying high-speed Internet customers. WOW! receives the highest ratings from customers in performance and reliability, image, customer service, billing, cost of service and offerings and promotions. Bright House Network’s Road Runner follows WOW! in the rankings and performs well in the billing, performance and reliability, and image factors. BellSouth ranks third in the segment.
Across all providers, the study finds that DSL subscribers are significantly more satisfied than their counterparts who use cable modems to access the Internet. Aggressive pricing by traditional telephone companies has led to cost of service being the largest gap in satisfaction between DSL and cable subscribers. Despite the discrepancy in overall satisfaction scores, cable modem penetration continues to climb, with 32 percent of all households subscribing to Internet service—up from 28 percent in 2005. DSL subscriptions are up as well, climbing from 16 percent of the market in 2005 to 23 percent in 2006.
PeoplePC, a California based national provider of dial-up Internet service, also makes its debut in the study, and ranks highest among providers in the dial-up Internet service segment. PeoplePC is a subsidiary of EarthLink. PeoplePC receives the highest ratings from customers in four factors: cost of service, billing, e-mail services, and offerings and promotions. BellSouth follows PeoplePC in the segment rankings and performs particularly well in customer service. EarthLink ranks third in the segment.
The study also finds several other key Internet usage patterns:
* Seventy-eight percent of households subscribe to an ISP—up 9 percentage points from 2005
* High-speed subscribers spend an average of 22.6 personal hours per week on the Internet
* Dial-up subscribers average 22.2 personal hours per week online—up 3 percent from 2005
* Data transfer speed is particularly important to both high speed and dial-up subscribers.
The 2006 ISP Residential Customer Satisfaction Study is based on responses from 10,787 residential customers of Internet service providers nationwide.
s the cost of high-speed Internet service declines and connection speeds become more important, high-speed service overtakes dial-up in market share for the first time, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2006 Internet Service Provider (ISP) Residential Customer Satisfaction StudySM released today.
The study finds that 56 percent of residential ISP customers subscribe to high-speed Internet service—an increase of 11 percentage points from 2005. Correspondingly, market share of dial-up service has dropped from 55 percent in 2005 to 44 percent in 2006. This trend is expected to continue, as the intent to switch service providers among dial-up customers has increased by 3 percentage points from 2005 to 21 percent in 2006, while switching intent among high-speed customers has essentially remained flat since 2003 at 11 percent.
The average amount subscribers report spending per month for high-speed Internet service has steadily decreased since 2004—down by $1.99 to $42.13 in 2006. During the same time period, the average amount dial-up service subscribers report spending has also declined; however, the drop is less significant—falling $0.69 from 2004 to $18.45 per month in 2006.
“Although high-speed Internet service is still considerably more expensive than dial-up, bundling high-speed with other products, such as telephone and video service, has made it an increasingly attractive option for many customers,” said Steve Kirkeby, executive director of telecommunications and technology research at J.D. Power and Associates. “This is not to say that dial-up services are completely out of the picture, as dial-up still holds a significant portion of the market. More specifically, customers are often willing to pay more for faster Internet speeds, provided they are getting other services for less. Our research shows that customers are increasingly expecting offerings and incentives that recognize their loyalty, and high-speed Internet is a critical piece of the most attractive bundled offers.”
The study, now in its ninth year, measures customer satisfaction with high-speed and dial-up Internet service providers based on seven factors. They are: performance and reliability; cost of service; image; customer service/technical support; billing; e-mail services; and offerings and promotions.
Included in the study for the first time, WideOpenWest! (WOW!) ranks highest in satisfying high-speed Internet customers. WOW! receives the highest ratings from customers in performance and reliability, image, customer service, billing, cost of service and offerings and promotions. Bright House Network’s Road Runner follows WOW! in the rankings and performs well in the billing, performance and reliability, and image factors. BellSouth ranks third in the segment.
Across all providers, the study finds that DSL subscribers are significantly more satisfied than their counterparts who use cable modems to access the Internet. Aggressive pricing by traditional telephone companies has led to cost of service being the largest gap in satisfaction between DSL and cable subscribers. Despite the discrepancy in overall satisfaction scores, cable modem penetration continues to climb, with 32 percent of all households subscribing to Internet service—up from 28 percent in 2005. DSL subscriptions are up as well, climbing from 16 percent of the market in 2005 to 23 percent in 2006.
PeoplePC, a California based national provider of dial-up Internet service, also makes its debut in the study, and ranks highest among providers in the dial-up Internet service segment. PeoplePC is a subsidiary of EarthLink. PeoplePC receives the highest ratings from customers in four factors: cost of service, billing, e-mail services, and offerings and promotions. BellSouth follows PeoplePC in the segment rankings and performs particularly well in customer service. EarthLink ranks third in the segment.
The study also finds several other key Internet usage patterns:
* Seventy-eight percent of households subscribe to an ISP—up 9 percentage points from 2005
* High-speed subscribers spend an average of 22.6 personal hours per week on the Internet
* Dial-up subscribers average 22.2 personal hours per week online—up 3 percent from 2005
* Data transfer speed is particularly important to both high speed and dial-up subscribers.
The 2006 ISP Residential Customer Satisfaction Study is based on responses from 10,787 residential customers of Internet service providers nationwide.
Q-Ray Bracelet Maker Loses Cases, Ordered To Pay $87 Million
The federal district court in Chicago has ruled for the Federal Trade Commission in its case against the marketers of the Q-Ray ionized bracelet following a bench trial earlier this summer. In a decision issued September 8, the court found that advertising by Que Te (Andrew) Park and his companies was false and misleading in representing that the bracelet provides immediate, significant, and/or complete pain relief, and that scientific tests proved that it relieves pain.
The court also found that the defendants deceptively advertised their refund policy. Although the court has not yet issued a final judgment order, it stated that it will require the defendants to turn over $22.5 million in net profits and pay up to $87 million in refunds to consumers. The court also stated that it will impose a permanent injunction to prevent them from engaging in such deceptive conduct in the future.
“This is an egregious example of false advertising," said Lydia Parnes, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. "These defendants lied about the so-called medicinal benefits of their product, and deceived people in pain. The judgment against them is a real victory for all consumers."
The FTC filed the case in May 2003, alleging that the defendants had misrepresented that the Q-Ray ionized bracelet “provides immediate significant or complete relief from various types of pain, including, but not limited to, musculoskeletal pain, sciatic pain, persistent headaches, sinus problems, tendinitis, or injuries,” and that “tests prove that the Q-Ray bracelet relieves pain.” The FTC also alleged that they falsely represented that defendant QT Inc.’s 30-day satisfaction guarantee permits "consumers to readily obtain a full refund of the purchase price if they return the Q-Ray bracelet within 30 days.”
The court found that defendants QT Inc., Q-Ray Company, and Bio-Metal, Inc., located in Illinois, and their owner, Que Te Park, also known as Andrew Q. Park, had engaged in misleading and false advertising in violation of Sections 5 and 12 of the FTC Act. The court did not find defendant Jung Joo Park (Que Te Park’s wife) liable.
From September 2000 through June 2003, the Q-Ray bracelet was advertised on infomercials shown on cable TV channels, such as the Golf Channel, the Learning Channel, USA Network, and the Discovery Channel, as well as on Internet Web sites and at trade shows. Retail prices for the bracelets ranged from $49.95 to $249.95 – a mark-up of over 650 percent, according to the court’s findings. Net sales to consumers, during the time the infomercials ran, were $87 million.
The court found that pain relief claims of the type made by the defendants should be supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence consisting of at least one well-conducted, placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind clinical study. The court held that the FTC met its burden of proof in establishing that the defendants did not have or rely upon any such data. The court also ruled that the claims were not supported even if some studies showed that the bracelets had a placebo effect, noting that, for a placebo to work, “the consumer must be duped” and that “the advertiser must trick the customer into believing that an inherently ineffective bracelet actually relieves pain.”
The defendants’ advertising described the Q-Ray bracelet as “ionized,” but the court found no evidence that the bracelet has any properties different from any other bracelet made of the same metals. Instead, it stated, “The Q-Ray bracelet was marketed as an ‘ionized bracelet’ as part of a scheme devised by Que Te Park and the corporate defendants to defraud consumers out of millions of dollars by preying on their desire to find a simple solution to alleviate their physical pain.”
The court also concluded that the defendants promoted the relationship between the Q-Ray bracelet and Eastern medicine as a marketing device, “which is a disservice to the practitioners of this ancient art.” The court found that Que Te Park had made up the theory and that “he had no testing or studies to support this theory and that he testified that anyone can find the theory on Google.” The court found that, “Defendants have sought to clothe the Q-Ray bracelet with the credibility of Traditional Chinese Medicine and thereby deceive consumers.”
The court has advised that it will require the defendants to pay a minimum of $22.5 million, representing their profits from January 2000 to June 2003. They also will be required to provide up to an additional $64.5 million in refunds to consumers who bought the bracelets during that time period. The court will issue a final judgment on September 28, 2006.
The FTC has set up a hotline number, 202-326-2063, for consumers with questions about the court’s opinion and order. Details about the refund program will be made available as they become known.
The federal district court in Chicago has ruled for the Federal Trade Commission in its case against the marketers of the Q-Ray ionized bracelet following a bench trial earlier this summer. In a decision issued September 8, the court found that advertising by Que Te (Andrew) Park and his companies was false and misleading in representing that the bracelet provides immediate, significant, and/or complete pain relief, and that scientific tests proved that it relieves pain.
The court also found that the defendants deceptively advertised their refund policy. Although the court has not yet issued a final judgment order, it stated that it will require the defendants to turn over $22.5 million in net profits and pay up to $87 million in refunds to consumers. The court also stated that it will impose a permanent injunction to prevent them from engaging in such deceptive conduct in the future.
“This is an egregious example of false advertising," said Lydia Parnes, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. "These defendants lied about the so-called medicinal benefits of their product, and deceived people in pain. The judgment against them is a real victory for all consumers."
The FTC filed the case in May 2003, alleging that the defendants had misrepresented that the Q-Ray ionized bracelet “provides immediate significant or complete relief from various types of pain, including, but not limited to, musculoskeletal pain, sciatic pain, persistent headaches, sinus problems, tendinitis, or injuries,” and that “tests prove that the Q-Ray bracelet relieves pain.” The FTC also alleged that they falsely represented that defendant QT Inc.’s 30-day satisfaction guarantee permits "consumers to readily obtain a full refund of the purchase price if they return the Q-Ray bracelet within 30 days.”
The court found that defendants QT Inc., Q-Ray Company, and Bio-Metal, Inc., located in Illinois, and their owner, Que Te Park, also known as Andrew Q. Park, had engaged in misleading and false advertising in violation of Sections 5 and 12 of the FTC Act. The court did not find defendant Jung Joo Park (Que Te Park’s wife) liable.
From September 2000 through June 2003, the Q-Ray bracelet was advertised on infomercials shown on cable TV channels, such as the Golf Channel, the Learning Channel, USA Network, and the Discovery Channel, as well as on Internet Web sites and at trade shows. Retail prices for the bracelets ranged from $49.95 to $249.95 – a mark-up of over 650 percent, according to the court’s findings. Net sales to consumers, during the time the infomercials ran, were $87 million.
The court found that pain relief claims of the type made by the defendants should be supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence consisting of at least one well-conducted, placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind clinical study. The court held that the FTC met its burden of proof in establishing that the defendants did not have or rely upon any such data. The court also ruled that the claims were not supported even if some studies showed that the bracelets had a placebo effect, noting that, for a placebo to work, “the consumer must be duped” and that “the advertiser must trick the customer into believing that an inherently ineffective bracelet actually relieves pain.”
The defendants’ advertising described the Q-Ray bracelet as “ionized,” but the court found no evidence that the bracelet has any properties different from any other bracelet made of the same metals. Instead, it stated, “The Q-Ray bracelet was marketed as an ‘ionized bracelet’ as part of a scheme devised by Que Te Park and the corporate defendants to defraud consumers out of millions of dollars by preying on their desire to find a simple solution to alleviate their physical pain.”
The court also concluded that the defendants promoted the relationship between the Q-Ray bracelet and Eastern medicine as a marketing device, “which is a disservice to the practitioners of this ancient art.” The court found that Que Te Park had made up the theory and that “he had no testing or studies to support this theory and that he testified that anyone can find the theory on Google.” The court found that, “Defendants have sought to clothe the Q-Ray bracelet with the credibility of Traditional Chinese Medicine and thereby deceive consumers.”
The court has advised that it will require the defendants to pay a minimum of $22.5 million, representing their profits from January 2000 to June 2003. They also will be required to provide up to an additional $64.5 million in refunds to consumers who bought the bracelets during that time period. The court will issue a final judgment on September 28, 2006.
The FTC has set up a hotline number, 202-326-2063, for consumers with questions about the court’s opinion and order. Details about the refund program will be made available as they become known.
More Spinach Recall Data
RLB Food Distributors, L.P., West Caldwell, NJ, is initiating a multiple east coast states voluntarily recall of certain salad products that may contain spinach with an Enjoy Thru date of 9/20/06.
RLB Food Distributors, L.P., West Caldwell, NJ, is initiating a multiple east coast states voluntarily recall of certain salad products that may contain spinach with an Enjoy Thru date of 9/20/06.
The products recalled by RLB are:
- Balducci's Mesclun Mix 5 oz.
- Balducci's Organic Baby Spinach 5 oz.
- Balducci's Mixed Greens 5 oz.
- FreshPro Mesclun Mix 5 oz.
- FreshPro Organic Baby Spinach 5 oz.
- FreshPro Mixed Greens 5 oz.
- FreshPro Salad Mix with Italian Dressing 4.75 oz.
- FreshPro Salad Mix with Ranch Dressing 5.25 oz
Spinach used in these products may have been supplied from Natural Selections Foods, a California grower and processor, to RLB Food Distributors. This recall was initiated when Natural Selections Foods issued on 9/15/06 a nation-wide recall of all their products that contain spinach because they may be contaminated with Escherichia coli 0157:H7 bacteria (E. coli). E. coli 0157:H7 causes a diarrhea illness often with bloody stools. Although most healthy adults can recover completely within a week, some people can develop a form of kidney failure called Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS). HUS is most likely to occur in young children and the elderly. The condition can lead to serious kidney damage and even death.
The recalled products were distributed in Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, Virginia and Washington DC. They can be identified by an "Enjoy Thru" date of 9/20/06 or before that is located on the bottom of the package.
No illnesses have been reported to us as of this date from consuming these products.
An investigation by the FDA, several states, and Natural Selections Foods is ongoing to identify the cause of the possible E. coli contamination.
Consumers who have purchased these products are urged to return them to the place of purchase for full refund. Customers with questions may contact RLB Food Distributors at 973-575-9526 X154.
358,000 Lego Trucks Recalled
LEGO and the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission have announced the recall of 358,000 LEGO EXPLORE Super Trucks.
The toys pose a safety hazard to children, according to the government agency, which issued a press release stating that there have been ten incident reports filed including two "serious" puncture wounds.
EGO EXPLORE Super Truck is a toy-in-toy product designed for children ages 18 months and up. The toy features a red plastic pick-up/dump truck that measures about 15-inches high and 19-inches wide with four 7-inch black plastic wheels that are packed with a box of 40 LEGO DUPLO bricks in the cargo area. The unit has a row of DUPLO “studs” across the top of the cab, molded yellow headlights and stickers on the front and sides of the unit create the idea of a windshield, windows and doors depicting a LEGO figure in the driver’s seat. The LEGO Explore logo is printed on the door stickers. The box of DUPLO bricks is not included in this recall.
Consumers should stop using the toy immediately and contact LEGO at (800) 718-1858.
LEGO and the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission have announced the recall of 358,000 LEGO EXPLORE Super Trucks.The toys pose a safety hazard to children, according to the government agency, which issued a press release stating that there have been ten incident reports filed including two "serious" puncture wounds.
EGO EXPLORE Super Truck is a toy-in-toy product designed for children ages 18 months and up. The toy features a red plastic pick-up/dump truck that measures about 15-inches high and 19-inches wide with four 7-inch black plastic wheels that are packed with a box of 40 LEGO DUPLO bricks in the cargo area. The unit has a row of DUPLO “studs” across the top of the cab, molded yellow headlights and stickers on the front and sides of the unit create the idea of a windshield, windows and doors depicting a LEGO figure in the driver’s seat. The LEGO Explore logo is printed on the door stickers. The box of DUPLO bricks is not included in this recall.
Consumers should stop using the toy immediately and contact LEGO at (800) 718-1858.
California Files Suit Against Auto Makers
California Attorney General Bill Lockyer today filed a lawsuit against leading U.S. and Japanese auto manufacturers, alleging their vehicles’ emissions have contributed significantly to global warming, harmed the resources, infrastructure and environmental health of California, and cost the state millions of dollars to address current and future effects.
“Global warming is causing significant harm to California’s environment, economy, agriculture and public health. The impacts are already costing millions of dollars and the price tag is increasing,” said Lockyer. “Vehicle emissions are the single most rapidly growing source of the carbon emissions contributing to global warming, yet the federal government and automakers have refused to act. It is time to hold these companies responsible for their contribution to this crisis.”
Filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the complaint names as defendants: Chrysler Motors Corporation, General Motors Corporation, Ford Motor Company, Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Honda North America, and Nissan North America. The lawsuit is the first of its kind to seek to hold manufacturers liable for the damages caused by greenhouse gases that their products emit. Lockyer filed the lawsuit on behalf of the People of the State of California.
The complaint alleges that under federal and state common law the automakers have created a public nuisance by producing “millions of vehicles that collectively emit massive quantities of carbon dioxide,” a greenhouse gas that traps atmospheric heat and causes global warming. Under the law, a “public nuisance” is an unreasonable interference with a public right, or an action that interferes with or causes harm to life, health or property. The complaint asks the court to hold the defendants liable for damages, including future harm, caused by their ongoing, substantial contribution to the public nuisance of global warming.
As stated in the complaint, the automakers produce vehicles that emit a combined 289 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in the United States each year. Those emissions, the complaint alleges, currently account for nearly 20 percent of the carbon dioxide emissions in the United States and more than 30 percent in California. The defendants rank “among the world’s largest contributors to global warming and the adverse impacts on California,” according to the complaint.
“Global warming has already injured California, it environment, its economy, and the health and well-being of its citizens,” the complaint alleges. “California is responding to the ongoing impacts and the inevitable additional future impacts of global warming. The State is spending millions of dollars on planning, monitoring, and infrastructure changes to address a large spectrum of current and anticipated impacts, including reduced snow pack, coastal and beach erosion, increased ozone pollution, sea water intrusion into Delta drinking supplies, response to impacts on wildlife, including endangered species and fish, wildfire risks, and the long-term need to monitor on-going and inevitable impacts. California has already begun to address the decline in the snow pack and earlier melting of the snow pack in order to avert water shortages and flooding in the future.” Dealing with global warming’s harmful effects, the complaint adds, “will almost certainly cost millions more.”
The AG's office did not comment on the impact of the suit on consumer prices for those automobiles.
California Attorney General Bill Lockyer today filed a lawsuit against leading U.S. and Japanese auto manufacturers, alleging their vehicles’ emissions have contributed significantly to global warming, harmed the resources, infrastructure and environmental health of California, and cost the state millions of dollars to address current and future effects.
“Global warming is causing significant harm to California’s environment, economy, agriculture and public health. The impacts are already costing millions of dollars and the price tag is increasing,” said Lockyer. “Vehicle emissions are the single most rapidly growing source of the carbon emissions contributing to global warming, yet the federal government and automakers have refused to act. It is time to hold these companies responsible for their contribution to this crisis.”
Filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the complaint names as defendants: Chrysler Motors Corporation, General Motors Corporation, Ford Motor Company, Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Honda North America, and Nissan North America. The lawsuit is the first of its kind to seek to hold manufacturers liable for the damages caused by greenhouse gases that their products emit. Lockyer filed the lawsuit on behalf of the People of the State of California.
The complaint alleges that under federal and state common law the automakers have created a public nuisance by producing “millions of vehicles that collectively emit massive quantities of carbon dioxide,” a greenhouse gas that traps atmospheric heat and causes global warming. Under the law, a “public nuisance” is an unreasonable interference with a public right, or an action that interferes with or causes harm to life, health or property. The complaint asks the court to hold the defendants liable for damages, including future harm, caused by their ongoing, substantial contribution to the public nuisance of global warming.
As stated in the complaint, the automakers produce vehicles that emit a combined 289 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in the United States each year. Those emissions, the complaint alleges, currently account for nearly 20 percent of the carbon dioxide emissions in the United States and more than 30 percent in California. The defendants rank “among the world’s largest contributors to global warming and the adverse impacts on California,” according to the complaint.
“Global warming has already injured California, it environment, its economy, and the health and well-being of its citizens,” the complaint alleges. “California is responding to the ongoing impacts and the inevitable additional future impacts of global warming. The State is spending millions of dollars on planning, monitoring, and infrastructure changes to address a large spectrum of current and anticipated impacts, including reduced snow pack, coastal and beach erosion, increased ozone pollution, sea water intrusion into Delta drinking supplies, response to impacts on wildlife, including endangered species and fish, wildfire risks, and the long-term need to monitor on-going and inevitable impacts. California has already begun to address the decline in the snow pack and earlier melting of the snow pack in order to avert water shortages and flooding in the future.” Dealing with global warming’s harmful effects, the complaint adds, “will almost certainly cost millions more.”
The AG's office did not comment on the impact of the suit on consumer prices for those automobiles.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Don't Date These Lonely Wives As FTC Shuts Spammers
The Federal Trade Commission has brought a permanent halt to four illegal spamming operations – including one that offered the opportunity to “date lonely wives” and two that hijacked the computers of unwitting third parties and used them to pelt consumers with graphic sexually explicit e-mail. The FTC charged the operators with sending spam that violated provisions of the CAN-SPAM Act, and has halted the illegal spamming.
The CAN-SPAM Act requires that a spam e-mail contain accurate header and subject lines, identify itself as an ad, and include the sender’s postal address. It also requires that the spam give recipients an opt-out method, so consumers can elect not to receive messages from the spammer in the future. To ensure that consumers are not exposed content they do not wish to view, the Adult Labeling Rule requires that senders use the phrase “SEXUALLY EXPLICIT: ”in the subject line of sexually explicit e-mail messages and ensure that the initially viewable area of the message does not contain graphic sexual images. The consent agreements announced today settle charges that the spammers violated the CAN-SPAM Act, the Adult Labeling Rule, or both.
Cleverlink Trading Limited and its partners will give up $400,000 in ill-gotten gains to settle FTC charges that their spam, or that of their affiliates, violated federal law. The agency charged that their “date lonely wives” spam violated nearly every provision of the CAN-SPAM Act. It contained misleading headers and deceptive subject lines. It did not contain a link to allow consumers to opt out of receiving future spam, did not contain a valid physical postal address, and did not contain the disclosure that it was sexually explicit. It also included sexual materials in the initially viewable area of the e-mail, in violation of the FTC’s Adult Labeling Rule. A U.S. District Court judge halted the illegal spamming at the FTC’s request and froze the defendants’ assets. The settlement announced today ends that litigation. The settlement with Cleverlink, Real World Media, Brian D. Muir, Jesse Goldberg, and Caleb Wolf Wickman bars future violations of the CAN-SPAM Act and the Adult Labeling Rule and requires extensive monitoring of their affiliates for future violations. They also will give up $400,000 in ill-gotten gains.
The FTC charged that Zachary Kinion sent spam hawking adult sites, mortgage rates, and privacy software and paid other spammers commissions to send spam messages for him. The FTC charged that he hid his true originating address by routing his spam through the computers of innocent third parties. The FTC charged him with violations of the CAN-SPAM Act, and a district court judge ordered a halt to the illegal spamming, pending trial. The settlement announced today ends the litigation. The settlement bars him from sending e-mails that contain false or misleading header information, misrepresent the subject matter of the message, fail to include an opt-out option, fail to include a postal address or fail to disclose the spam is an ad. The order contains a judgment of $151,000 – the total amount he made from his illegal spamming – which is suspended because of his inability to pay. Finally, it requires that he monitor any affiliates for CAN-SPAM Act violations.
One spam operation used “spam zombies” – computers used without their owners’ knowledge or consent – to conceal the source of the sexually explicit spam. The FTC alleged that the defendants did not have authorization to use the “zombie”computers and that their spam violated provisions of the Adult Labeling Rule that prohibit sexually explicit images in the initially viewable area of an e-mail and that the label “SEXUALLY EXPLICIT: ” appear in the subject line. The settlement with William Dugger, Angelina Johnson, and John Vitale calls for them to give up $8,000 in ill-gotten gains and bars them from violating CAN-SPAM and the Adult Labeling Rule. It also requires that before they use third parties’ computers to send spam, they must obtain authorization from the computer’s owner and inform the owner how the computer will be used.
Another operator was a professional “button pusher,” who used spam to drive traffic to Web sites run by third parties. The FTC alleged that in an attempt to conceal the source of the spam, the spammer routed his promotions for pharmaceuticals and adult content through unwitting consumers’ computers. The FTC charged Brian McMullen, doing business as BM Entertainment and B Pimp, with violating the CAN-SPAM Act. The settlement bars future violations and imposes a judgment of $24,193, which is suspended based on his inability to pay. In addition, the defendant has pleaded guilty to criminal charges related to spam and unauthorized possession of access devices – credit cards. He currently is awaiting sentencing.
The Federal Trade Commission has brought a permanent halt to four illegal spamming operations – including one that offered the opportunity to “date lonely wives” and two that hijacked the computers of unwitting third parties and used them to pelt consumers with graphic sexually explicit e-mail. The FTC charged the operators with sending spam that violated provisions of the CAN-SPAM Act, and has halted the illegal spamming.
The CAN-SPAM Act requires that a spam e-mail contain accurate header and subject lines, identify itself as an ad, and include the sender’s postal address. It also requires that the spam give recipients an opt-out method, so consumers can elect not to receive messages from the spammer in the future. To ensure that consumers are not exposed content they do not wish to view, the Adult Labeling Rule requires that senders use the phrase “SEXUALLY EXPLICIT: ”in the subject line of sexually explicit e-mail messages and ensure that the initially viewable area of the message does not contain graphic sexual images. The consent agreements announced today settle charges that the spammers violated the CAN-SPAM Act, the Adult Labeling Rule, or both.
Cleverlink Trading Limited and its partners will give up $400,000 in ill-gotten gains to settle FTC charges that their spam, or that of their affiliates, violated federal law. The agency charged that their “date lonely wives” spam violated nearly every provision of the CAN-SPAM Act. It contained misleading headers and deceptive subject lines. It did not contain a link to allow consumers to opt out of receiving future spam, did not contain a valid physical postal address, and did not contain the disclosure that it was sexually explicit. It also included sexual materials in the initially viewable area of the e-mail, in violation of the FTC’s Adult Labeling Rule. A U.S. District Court judge halted the illegal spamming at the FTC’s request and froze the defendants’ assets. The settlement announced today ends that litigation. The settlement with Cleverlink, Real World Media, Brian D. Muir, Jesse Goldberg, and Caleb Wolf Wickman bars future violations of the CAN-SPAM Act and the Adult Labeling Rule and requires extensive monitoring of their affiliates for future violations. They also will give up $400,000 in ill-gotten gains.
The FTC charged that Zachary Kinion sent spam hawking adult sites, mortgage rates, and privacy software and paid other spammers commissions to send spam messages for him. The FTC charged that he hid his true originating address by routing his spam through the computers of innocent third parties. The FTC charged him with violations of the CAN-SPAM Act, and a district court judge ordered a halt to the illegal spamming, pending trial. The settlement announced today ends the litigation. The settlement bars him from sending e-mails that contain false or misleading header information, misrepresent the subject matter of the message, fail to include an opt-out option, fail to include a postal address or fail to disclose the spam is an ad. The order contains a judgment of $151,000 – the total amount he made from his illegal spamming – which is suspended because of his inability to pay. Finally, it requires that he monitor any affiliates for CAN-SPAM Act violations.
One spam operation used “spam zombies” – computers used without their owners’ knowledge or consent – to conceal the source of the sexually explicit spam. The FTC alleged that the defendants did not have authorization to use the “zombie”computers and that their spam violated provisions of the Adult Labeling Rule that prohibit sexually explicit images in the initially viewable area of an e-mail and that the label “SEXUALLY EXPLICIT: ” appear in the subject line. The settlement with William Dugger, Angelina Johnson, and John Vitale calls for them to give up $8,000 in ill-gotten gains and bars them from violating CAN-SPAM and the Adult Labeling Rule. It also requires that before they use third parties’ computers to send spam, they must obtain authorization from the computer’s owner and inform the owner how the computer will be used.
Another operator was a professional “button pusher,” who used spam to drive traffic to Web sites run by third parties. The FTC alleged that in an attempt to conceal the source of the spam, the spammer routed his promotions for pharmaceuticals and adult content through unwitting consumers’ computers. The FTC charged Brian McMullen, doing business as BM Entertainment and B Pimp, with violating the CAN-SPAM Act. The settlement bars future violations and imposes a judgment of $24,193, which is suspended based on his inability to pay. In addition, the defendant has pleaded guilty to criminal charges related to spam and unauthorized possession of access devices – credit cards. He currently is awaiting sentencing.
Carrot Juce Not Quite Spinach, But Still Needs Care, Says FDA
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is advising consumers of the vital importance of keeping carrot juice—including pasteurized carrot juice—refrigerated. There are three cases of botulism in the state of Georgia associated with pasteurized carrot juice that may have been due to the product not being properly refrigerated.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is advising consumers of the vital importance of keeping carrot juice—including pasteurized carrot juice—refrigerated. There are three cases of botulism in the state of Georgia associated with pasteurized carrot juice that may have been due to the product not being properly refrigerated.
FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and health authorities in Georgia have been closely monitoring and continue to investigate these three cases of foodborne botulism.
On September 15, 2006, Georgia health authorities issued a press statement, which in part stated the following: "…At this time we believe that these three cases are an isolated incident…. During the investigation, other community members have been identified as having purchased and consumed the same product from the same vendor within the past three weeks. These persons have not become ill or developed any symptoms. The fact that additional cases have not been identified suggests that the toxin was not present before the sale of the product…"
"Because botulism is such a potentially serious illness, we want to remind consumers that it is critical to refrigerate carrot juice for safety. Consumers should not keep carrot juice unrefrigerated," said Dr. Robert Brackett, Director of FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN). Inadequate refrigeration of carrot juice allows botulinum spores to multiply to the level at which they can cause illness.
Botulism is a rare but serious paralytic illness caused by botulinum toxin, a nerve poison that under certain conditions is produced by Clostridium botulinum, a bacterium commonly found in soil. Botulism can be fatal and is considered a medical emergency. Foodborne botulism is not common in the United States; an average of 24 cases are reported each year. Botulinum poisoning can result in the following symptoms: double-vision, droopy eyelids and altered voice or trouble with speaking or swallowing, and paralysis on both sides of the body that progresses from the neck down, possibly followed by difficulty in breathing. People experiencing these problems should seek immediate medical attention.
Adequate refrigeration is one of the keys to food safety. Cold temperatures keep most harmful pathogens from growing and multiplying. Refrigerator temperatures should be no higher than 40°F and freezers no higher then 0°F. Consumers should check the temperatures occasionally with an appliance thermometer.
Consumers should look for the words "Keep Refrigerated" or "Refrigerate After Opening" on juice labels to know whether the product should be refrigerated. FDA is looking into whether the industry is providing clear labeling on refrigeration of juice products during storage.
Guidance on labeling of foods that need refrigeration by consumers, particularly for safety, is available at http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/fr970224.html.
Consumers with questions about juice safety also may call 1-800-SAFEFOOD.
800,000 Canon Desktop Copiers Are Fire Hazard
The Consumer Product Safety Commission has recalled 800,000 Canon desktop copiers because the government agency says that they pose a fire hazard. The agency and Canon, who is voluntarily cooperating with the recall, said that an improperly fitting electrical connection inside the copier can overheat and catch fire. Canon has reported six such cases with no injuries.
Subject to the recall are 800,000 units of Canon copiers. The repair recall includes the following models: PC6, PC6RE, PC65, PC7, PC7RE, PC8, PC11, PC11RE, PC12, NP1010 and NP1020.
Consumers can find the model number on the front panel of the unit. The recalled copiers were manufactured between 1987 and 1998.
The CPSC advised consumers to stop using the copiers immediately and contact the company for a repair. Canon's phone number is (800) 828-4040.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission has recalled 800,000 Canon desktop copiers because the government agency says that they pose a fire hazard. The agency and Canon, who is voluntarily cooperating with the recall, said that an improperly fitting electrical connection inside the copier can overheat and catch fire. Canon has reported six such cases with no injuries.
Subject to the recall are 800,000 units of Canon copiers. The repair recall includes the following models: PC6, PC6RE, PC65, PC7, PC7RE, PC8, PC11, PC11RE, PC12, NP1010 and NP1020.
Consumers can find the model number on the front panel of the unit. The recalled copiers were manufactured between 1987 and 1998.
The CPSC advised consumers to stop using the copiers immediately and contact the company for a repair. Canon's phone number is (800) 828-4040.
Prescription Drugs Rise 6.3%, AARP Study Finds
In a poll and related report released today, AARP found prescription drug affordability continues to challenge Americans as manufacturer prices for nearly 200 of the most commonly used brand name medications for older adults rose, on average, 6.3% in the 12 months ending with June 2006.
In a poll and related report released today, AARP found prescription drug affordability continues to challenge Americans as manufacturer prices for nearly 200 of the most commonly used brand name medications for older adults rose, on average, 6.3% in the 12 months ending with June 2006.
According to AARP's latest quarterly Watchdog that monitors drug prices, the average manufacturer price increase for brand name drugs continues to outpace the annual 3.8% rate of general inflation for that same period. On average, manufacturers of 75 generic drugs widely used by people age 50+ increased prices by a relatively low 0.4%.
"Frustration over this issue will lead to action," said AARP Senior Managing Director of Government Relations David Sloane, citing a new AARP election "pulse poll." Voters ages 42 and over, the most likely to cast ballots in November, defined prescription drug affordability as a major concern. The new AARP election "pulse poll" found that this issue rises to the top of domestic issues for November."Although millions in Medicare are now saving with the help of their Medicare drug plans, those in the coverage gap are paying on their own and know how expensive their medications have become. In addition, nearly seven million Americans ages 50-64 have no health insurance, are paying full freight, and need relief," explained Sloane.
Friday, September 15, 2006
Payday Loans Continue To Come Under Fire
Draped in the American flag in a country fighting multiple wars, the U.S. Senate yesterday heard testimony about the prevalance and ramifications of "payday loans". Drive through any military town and you'll see signs that offer money now in exchange for future wages. While that's a risky business in many cases, the military's stability removes much of the risk. And because of loopholes in lending laws, interest rates soar well past 100%.
Many military installations have specially trained financial counselors to work with service personnel, who do not typically make a lot of money. In some cases, the person is not only making a low wage, but is a young consumer who is inexperienced in such matters.
The Washington Post quotes a Department of Defense study released last month that said nearly 1 in 5 service personnel use payday loans. The U.S. Senate Banking Committee is studing the issue now.
Draped in the American flag in a country fighting multiple wars, the U.S. Senate yesterday heard testimony about the prevalance and ramifications of "payday loans". Drive through any military town and you'll see signs that offer money now in exchange for future wages. While that's a risky business in many cases, the military's stability removes much of the risk. And because of loopholes in lending laws, interest rates soar well past 100%.
Many military installations have specially trained financial counselors to work with service personnel, who do not typically make a lot of money. In some cases, the person is not only making a low wage, but is a young consumer who is inexperienced in such matters.
The Washington Post quotes a Department of Defense study released last month that said nearly 1 in 5 service personnel use payday loans. The U.S. Senate Banking Committee is studing the issue now.
Gov't Want Stability Control On Vehicles In Five Years
A new proposal to require auto manufacturers to install electronic stability control (ESC) as a standard feature on all new passenger vehicles has the potential to save more than 10,000 lives every year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced yesterday.
If the rule passes, auto manufacturers must begin equipping passenger vehicles under 10,000 pounds with ESC starting with the 2009 model year and to have the feature available as standard equipment on all vehicles by the 2012 model year (September 2011).
ESC systems use automatic computer-controlled braking of individual wheels to help the driver maintain control in situations where a vehicle without ESC would skid out of control and likely leave the road. Nearly all rollover crashes occur after a vehicle leaves the road. A 2004 study by NHTSA estimated that ESC reduced fatalities in single-vehicle crashes by 30 percent for passenger cars and 63 percent for SUVs.
NHTSA Administrator Nicole Nason called electronic stability control for cars "the greatest life saving improvement since the safety belt."
The agency estimates that ESC will save between 5,300 and 10,300 lives annually and prevent between 168,000 and 252,000 injuries. ESC will prevent between 4,200 and 5,400 of the more than 10,000 deaths that occur each year as a result of rollover crashes.
NHTSA estaimates the average cost per vehicle will be $111 on vehicles that already include ABS brakes.
Since 2004, NHTSA has urged manufacturers to voluntarily add ESC as standard equipment on vehicles. As a result, almost 29 percent of all 2006 models -- 57 percent of SUVs - are already equipped with ESC.
FTC Continues Attacking Spammers, Zombies Targeted
The Federal Trade Commission has brought a permanent halt to four illegal spamming operations --including one that offered the opportunity to “date lonely wives” and two that hijacked the computers of unwitting third parties and used them to pelt consumers with graphic sexually explicit e-mail. The FTC charged the operators with sending spam that violated provisions of the CAN-SPAM Act, and has halted the illegal spamming.
The CAN-SPAM Act requires that a spam e-mail contain accurate header and subject lines, identify itself as an ad, and include the sender’s postal address. It also requires that the spam give recipients an opt-out method, so consumers can elect not to receive messages from the spammer in the future. To ensure that consumers are not exposed content they do not wish to view, the Adult Labeling Rule requires that senders use the phrase "SEXUALLY EXPLICIT: "in the subject line of sexually explicit e-mail messages and ensure that the initially viewable area of the message does not contain graphic sexual images. The consent agreements announced today settle charges that the spammers violated the CAN-SPAM Act, the Adult Labeling Rule, or both.
Cleverlink Trading Limited and its partners will give up $400,000 in ill-gotten gains to settle FTC charges that their spam, or that of their affiliates, violated federal law. The agency charged that their "date lonely wives" spam violated nearly every provision of the CAN-SPAM Act. It contained misleading headers and deceptive subject lines. It did not contain a link to allow consumers to opt out of receiving future spam, did not contain a valid physical postal address, and did not contain the disclosure that it was sexually explicit. It also included sexual materials in the initially viewable area of the e-mail, in violation of the FTC's Adult Labeling Rule. A U.S. District Court judge halted the illegal spamming at the FTC's request and froze the defendants' assets. The settlement announced today ends that litigation. The settlement with Cleverlink, Real World Media, Brian D. Muir, Jesse Goldberg, and Caleb Wolf Wickman bars future violations of the CAN-SPAM Act and the Adult Labeling Rule and requires extensive monitoring of their affiliates for future violations. They also will give up $400,000 in ill-gotten gains.
The FTC charged that Zachary Kinion sent spam hawking adult sites, mortgage rates, and privacy software and paid other spammers commissions to send spam messages for him. The FTC charged that he hid his true originating address by routing his spam through the computers of innocent third parties. The FTC charged him with violations of the CAN-SPAM Act, and a district court judge ordered a halt to the illegal spamming, pending trial. The settlement announced today ends the litigation. The settlement bars him from sending e-mails that contain false or misleading header information, misrepresent the subject matter of the message, fail to include an opt-out option, fail to include a postal address or fail to disclose the spam is an ad. The order contains a judgment of $151,000 – the total amount he made from his illegal spamming – which is suspended because of his inability to pay. Finally, it requires that he monitor any affiliates for CAN-SPAM Act violations.
One spam operation used "spam zombies" – computers used without their owners' knowledge or consent – to conceal the source of the sexually explicit spam. The FTC alleged that the defendants did not have authorization to use the 'zombie"computers and that their spam violated provisions of the Adult Labeling Rule that prohibit sexually explicit images in the initially viewable area of an e-mail and that the label "SEXUALLY EXPLICIT: " appear in the subject line. The settlement with William Dugger, Angelina Johnson, and John Vitale calls for them to give up $8,000 in ill-gotten gains and bars them from violating CAN-SPAM and the Adult Labeling Rule. It also requires that before they use third parties’ computers to send spam, they must obtain authorization from the computer’s owner and inform the owner how the computer will be used.
Another operator was a professional "button pusher," who used spam to drive traffic to Web sites run by third parties. The FTC alleged that in an attempt to conceal the source of the spam, the spammer routed his promotions for pharmaceuticals and adult content through unwitting consumers’ computers. The FTC charged Brian McMullen, doing business as BM Entertainment and B Pimp, with violating the CAN-SPAM Act. The settlement bars future violations and imposes a judgment of $24,193, which is suspended based on his inability to pay. In addition, the defendant has pleaded guilty to criminal charges related to spam and unauthorized possession of access devices -- credit cards. He currently is awaiting sentencing.
All of the settlements contain standard record-keeping provisions to allow the agency to monitor compliance.
The Federal Trade Commission has brought a permanent halt to four illegal spamming operations --including one that offered the opportunity to “date lonely wives” and two that hijacked the computers of unwitting third parties and used them to pelt consumers with graphic sexually explicit e-mail. The FTC charged the operators with sending spam that violated provisions of the CAN-SPAM Act, and has halted the illegal spamming.
The CAN-SPAM Act requires that a spam e-mail contain accurate header and subject lines, identify itself as an ad, and include the sender’s postal address. It also requires that the spam give recipients an opt-out method, so consumers can elect not to receive messages from the spammer in the future. To ensure that consumers are not exposed content they do not wish to view, the Adult Labeling Rule requires that senders use the phrase "SEXUALLY EXPLICIT: "in the subject line of sexually explicit e-mail messages and ensure that the initially viewable area of the message does not contain graphic sexual images. The consent agreements announced today settle charges that the spammers violated the CAN-SPAM Act, the Adult Labeling Rule, or both.
Cleverlink Trading Limited and its partners will give up $400,000 in ill-gotten gains to settle FTC charges that their spam, or that of their affiliates, violated federal law. The agency charged that their "date lonely wives" spam violated nearly every provision of the CAN-SPAM Act. It contained misleading headers and deceptive subject lines. It did not contain a link to allow consumers to opt out of receiving future spam, did not contain a valid physical postal address, and did not contain the disclosure that it was sexually explicit. It also included sexual materials in the initially viewable area of the e-mail, in violation of the FTC's Adult Labeling Rule. A U.S. District Court judge halted the illegal spamming at the FTC's request and froze the defendants' assets. The settlement announced today ends that litigation. The settlement with Cleverlink, Real World Media, Brian D. Muir, Jesse Goldberg, and Caleb Wolf Wickman bars future violations of the CAN-SPAM Act and the Adult Labeling Rule and requires extensive monitoring of their affiliates for future violations. They also will give up $400,000 in ill-gotten gains.
The FTC charged that Zachary Kinion sent spam hawking adult sites, mortgage rates, and privacy software and paid other spammers commissions to send spam messages for him. The FTC charged that he hid his true originating address by routing his spam through the computers of innocent third parties. The FTC charged him with violations of the CAN-SPAM Act, and a district court judge ordered a halt to the illegal spamming, pending trial. The settlement announced today ends the litigation. The settlement bars him from sending e-mails that contain false or misleading header information, misrepresent the subject matter of the message, fail to include an opt-out option, fail to include a postal address or fail to disclose the spam is an ad. The order contains a judgment of $151,000 – the total amount he made from his illegal spamming – which is suspended because of his inability to pay. Finally, it requires that he monitor any affiliates for CAN-SPAM Act violations.
One spam operation used "spam zombies" – computers used without their owners' knowledge or consent – to conceal the source of the sexually explicit spam. The FTC alleged that the defendants did not have authorization to use the 'zombie"computers and that their spam violated provisions of the Adult Labeling Rule that prohibit sexually explicit images in the initially viewable area of an e-mail and that the label "SEXUALLY EXPLICIT: " appear in the subject line. The settlement with William Dugger, Angelina Johnson, and John Vitale calls for them to give up $8,000 in ill-gotten gains and bars them from violating CAN-SPAM and the Adult Labeling Rule. It also requires that before they use third parties’ computers to send spam, they must obtain authorization from the computer’s owner and inform the owner how the computer will be used.
Another operator was a professional "button pusher," who used spam to drive traffic to Web sites run by third parties. The FTC alleged that in an attempt to conceal the source of the spam, the spammer routed his promotions for pharmaceuticals and adult content through unwitting consumers’ computers. The FTC charged Brian McMullen, doing business as BM Entertainment and B Pimp, with violating the CAN-SPAM Act. The settlement bars future violations and imposes a judgment of $24,193, which is suspended based on his inability to pay. In addition, the defendant has pleaded guilty to criminal charges related to spam and unauthorized possession of access devices -- credit cards. He currently is awaiting sentencing.
All of the settlements contain standard record-keeping provisions to allow the agency to monitor compliance.
HEALTH WARNING - Don't Eat Bagged Spinach Say Feds
Americans woke up Friday to hearing someone reputable telling them that they did not have to eat their spinach -- Uncle Sam. The Food and Drug Administration says "multiple" cases of a bad strain of E.coli are being reported through multiple states. Fifty cases have been reported to the CDC, including one death.
E. coli O157:H7 causes diarrhea, often with bloody stools. Although most healthy adults can recover completely within a week, some people can develop a form of kidney failure called Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS). HUS is most likely to occur in young children and the elderly. The condition can lead to serious kidney damage and even death.
Although the government recommendation is voluntary, a national recall of bagged, fresh spinach is within the government's scope of authority. “Given the severity of this illness and the seriousness of the outbreak, FDA believes that a warning to consumers is needed. We are working closely with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and state and local agencies to determine the cause and scope of the problem,” said Dr. Robert Brackett, Director of FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN).
So for now, you've got a pass for skipping the leafy green stuff.
Americans woke up Friday to hearing someone reputable telling them that they did not have to eat their spinach -- Uncle Sam. The Food and Drug Administration says "multiple" cases of a bad strain of E.coli are being reported through multiple states. Fifty cases have been reported to the CDC, including one death.
E. coli O157:H7 causes diarrhea, often with bloody stools. Although most healthy adults can recover completely within a week, some people can develop a form of kidney failure called Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS). HUS is most likely to occur in young children and the elderly. The condition can lead to serious kidney damage and even death.
Although the government recommendation is voluntary, a national recall of bagged, fresh spinach is within the government's scope of authority. “Given the severity of this illness and the seriousness of the outbreak, FDA believes that a warning to consumers is needed. We are working closely with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and state and local agencies to determine the cause and scope of the problem,” said Dr. Robert Brackett, Director of FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN).
So for now, you've got a pass for skipping the leafy green stuff.
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Insurance Group Releases Tests On New Fords Toyotas, Side Air Bags Lauded
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety recently tested four 2007 model vehicles with side airbags: Toyota FJ Cruiser and Ford Freestyle (midsize SUVs); Ford Fusion (midsize moderately priced car) and Ford Crown Victoria (large family car). The FJ Cruiser and Freestyle earn good ratings for protection in side crashes. The Fusion is rated acceptable, and the Crown Victoria is marginal. Side airbags are optional in the FJ Cruiser and Crown Victoria. The Fusion has been upgraded to standard side airbags for the 2007 model year. The Freestyle will have standard side airbags in 2007s built after September.
"We commend Ford for making side airbags standard in the Fusion and Freestyle," says Institute president Adrian Lund. "A few years ago, it was rare to find these standard in moderately priced family vehicles, but they're quickly becoming the norm."
The tests were conducted outside of the Institute's normal schedule at the request of the manufacturers. Tests of the Crown Victoria and Fusion update earlier tests of these vehicles without side airbags.
"Manufacturers may request a test because they've made changes to improve a vehicle's performance or they have a new vehicle they think will earn a good rating," Lund explains. "We encourage these requests because it means manufacturers are striving to make their vehicles safer, and we can get the results out to consumers earlier. When we do conduct tests early the manufacturers provide reimbursement for the cost of the vehicles."
Summary of test results: The FJ Cruiser with optional side airbags earned a good rating. Intrusion into the occupant compartment was minimal. Performance in all categories (dummy injury measures, head protection, and structure) was good across the board.
"A perfect score," Lund points out.
The Freestyle's structure didn't perform quite as well, but this vehicle is rated good overall. The dummies' heads were protected from hitting any hard structures by side curtain-style airbags that deploy from above the windows.
Both the Fusion and Crown Victoria (also sold by Mercury as the Milan and Grand Marquis) with side airbags improved compared with the poor ratings earned by 2006 models tested without side airbags. In the new test of the Fusion, head protection was good but measures recorded on the driver dummy indicated that a fracture of the pelvis would be possible in a crash of this severity. The Fusion with side airbags earned an overall rating of acceptable for side impact protection. In the Crown Victoria, head protection also improved, but this car is rated marginal because of high forces recorded on the driver dummy's pelvis and poor structural performance. (Note: These ratings do not apply to 2006 models equipped with optional side airbags. Ford changed the side airbags, door structure, and interior trim of 2007 Fusions and the side airbags and interior trim of 2007 Crown Victorias to improve occupant protection in side impacts.)
How vehicles are evaluated: Each vehicle's overall side evaluation is based on performance in a crash test in which the side of the vehicle is struck by a barrier moving at 31 mph. The barrier represents the front end of a pickup or SUV. Ratings reflect injury measures recorded on two instrumented SID-IIs dummies, both representing a small woman or preteen; assessment of head protection countermeasures; and the vehicle's structural performance during the impact. Injury measures obtained from the two dummies, one in the driver seat and the other in the rear seat behind the driver, are used to determine the likelihood that the driver and/or passenger in a real-world crash would have sustained serious injury to various body regions. The movements and contacts of the dummies' heads during the crash also are evaluated. Structural performance is based on measurements indicating the amount of B-pillar intrusion into the occupant compartment.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety recently tested four 2007 model vehicles with side airbags: Toyota FJ Cruiser and Ford Freestyle (midsize SUVs); Ford Fusion (midsize moderately priced car) and Ford Crown Victoria (large family car). The FJ Cruiser and Freestyle earn good ratings for protection in side crashes. The Fusion is rated acceptable, and the Crown Victoria is marginal. Side airbags are optional in the FJ Cruiser and Crown Victoria. The Fusion has been upgraded to standard side airbags for the 2007 model year. The Freestyle will have standard side airbags in 2007s built after September.
"We commend Ford for making side airbags standard in the Fusion and Freestyle," says Institute president Adrian Lund. "A few years ago, it was rare to find these standard in moderately priced family vehicles, but they're quickly becoming the norm."
The tests were conducted outside of the Institute's normal schedule at the request of the manufacturers. Tests of the Crown Victoria and Fusion update earlier tests of these vehicles without side airbags.
"Manufacturers may request a test because they've made changes to improve a vehicle's performance or they have a new vehicle they think will earn a good rating," Lund explains. "We encourage these requests because it means manufacturers are striving to make their vehicles safer, and we can get the results out to consumers earlier. When we do conduct tests early the manufacturers provide reimbursement for the cost of the vehicles."
Summary of test results: The FJ Cruiser with optional side airbags earned a good rating. Intrusion into the occupant compartment was minimal. Performance in all categories (dummy injury measures, head protection, and structure) was good across the board.
"A perfect score," Lund points out.
The Freestyle's structure didn't perform quite as well, but this vehicle is rated good overall. The dummies' heads were protected from hitting any hard structures by side curtain-style airbags that deploy from above the windows.
Both the Fusion and Crown Victoria (also sold by Mercury as the Milan and Grand Marquis) with side airbags improved compared with the poor ratings earned by 2006 models tested without side airbags. In the new test of the Fusion, head protection was good but measures recorded on the driver dummy indicated that a fracture of the pelvis would be possible in a crash of this severity. The Fusion with side airbags earned an overall rating of acceptable for side impact protection. In the Crown Victoria, head protection also improved, but this car is rated marginal because of high forces recorded on the driver dummy's pelvis and poor structural performance. (Note: These ratings do not apply to 2006 models equipped with optional side airbags. Ford changed the side airbags, door structure, and interior trim of 2007 Fusions and the side airbags and interior trim of 2007 Crown Victorias to improve occupant protection in side impacts.)
How vehicles are evaluated: Each vehicle's overall side evaluation is based on performance in a crash test in which the side of the vehicle is struck by a barrier moving at 31 mph. The barrier represents the front end of a pickup or SUV. Ratings reflect injury measures recorded on two instrumented SID-IIs dummies, both representing a small woman or preteen; assessment of head protection countermeasures; and the vehicle's structural performance during the impact. Injury measures obtained from the two dummies, one in the driver seat and the other in the rear seat behind the driver, are used to determine the likelihood that the driver and/or passenger in a real-world crash would have sustained serious injury to various body regions. The movements and contacts of the dummies' heads during the crash also are evaluated. Structural performance is based on measurements indicating the amount of B-pillar intrusion into the occupant compartment.
Famous Segway Has Recall, Riders Couljd Fall On Some Models
Over twenty thousand of Segway's Personal Transporters have been recalled because the machine can unexpectedly apply reverse torque to the wheels, which can cause a rider to fall. This can occur when the device is tilted back by the Speed Limiter and the rider comes off and then back onto the device within a short period of time.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission urged consumers to stop using the devices immediately and contact the company for a refund. This recall involves all Segway PT i167, i170 and i180 ("i Series") models, the p133 ("p Series"), XT ("cross-terrain transporter"), GT ("golf transporter) and i2 models. These units were sold to consumers and commercial customers. All e167 ("e Series") models, which were sold to commercial users, also are included in this recall. No other models are involved in this recall. The name, "Segway", appears on the front bumper and/or on the handlebars of the personal transporter.
Consumers can call Segway Inc. at (800) 750-6557 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. ET Monday through Friday, or visit the company's website.
========
In other recall news, 42,000 counterfeit extension cords have also been recalled. The recalled cords are brown or white, measure 6, 9, 12, or 15 feet long, are intended for indoors and have a three-outlet extension. Attached to the cord is a silver counterfeit UL holographic label marked "09/99 E157848 UL LISTED CORD SET BV-8021 13A 125V 1625W" or "09/02 E137398 UL LISTED CORD SET BW 5833 13A 125V 1625W."
John Deere is also recalling 3,100 gas grills manufacturered for it by another company because operating the grill in windy conditions can blow the flame under the control panel, causing the grill to overheat or cause flashbacks. Flames could damage the hose that supplies gas to the burner, causing an uncontrolled flame. Also, the grill's control knobs could overheat, resulting in burns to hands.
Consumers should stop using these grills and contact Mi-T-M Corp. or the John Deere dealer where the grill was purchased to receive a free repair kit.
Over twenty thousand of Segway's Personal Transporters have been recalled because the machine can unexpectedly apply reverse torque to the wheels, which can cause a rider to fall. This can occur when the device is tilted back by the Speed Limiter and the rider comes off and then back onto the device within a short period of time.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission urged consumers to stop using the devices immediately and contact the company for a refund. This recall involves all Segway PT i167, i170 and i180 ("i Series") models, the p133 ("p Series"), XT ("cross-terrain transporter"), GT ("golf transporter) and i2 models. These units were sold to consumers and commercial customers. All e167 ("e Series") models, which were sold to commercial users, also are included in this recall. No other models are involved in this recall. The name, "Segway", appears on the front bumper and/or on the handlebars of the personal transporter.
Consumers can call Segway Inc. at (800) 750-6557 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. ET Monday through Friday, or visit the company's website.
========
In other recall news, 42,000 counterfeit extension cords have also been recalled. The recalled cords are brown or white, measure 6, 9, 12, or 15 feet long, are intended for indoors and have a three-outlet extension. Attached to the cord is a silver counterfeit UL holographic label marked "09/99 E157848 UL LISTED CORD SET BV-8021 13A 125V 1625W" or "09/02 E137398 UL LISTED CORD SET BW 5833 13A 125V 1625W."
John Deere is also recalling 3,100 gas grills manufacturered for it by another company because operating the grill in windy conditions can blow the flame under the control panel, causing the grill to overheat or cause flashbacks. Flames could damage the hose that supplies gas to the burner, causing an uncontrolled flame. Also, the grill's control knobs could overheat, resulting in burns to hands.
Consumers should stop using these grills and contact Mi-T-M Corp. or the John Deere dealer where the grill was purchased to receive a free repair kit.
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Slomin Shield Refuses To Answer Customer Complaint Letter
Consumer Help Web was retained by a customer regarding the failure of the monitoring equipment at his home .
Our customer tells us that he signed a five year agreement February 18, 2005. On July 25 of this year, the family returned from a trip and found that their home was unprotected because the system was not functional. A serviceman dispatched by the company reportedly said the "main box was burned out" and referred to this equipment failure as "an Act of God". He also demanded payment of $300 to restore the system and refused to guarantee that the problem would not be repeated. Given Slomins' inability to repair the unit and guarantee their work, our customer requested that they be released from their agreement. This request was sent July 28, 2006 by registered letter. Instead of the $300 repair fee, they were instead told that they would have to pay more than $900 to be released from the agreement.
Full details of this complaint were sent to the company's senior management in August 2006, yet they still had not answered. As part of Consumer Help Web's complaint resolution service, our customer was given a referral to the local government consumer regulatory agency and a second referral to a local consumer attorney.
Consumer Help Web was retained by a customer regarding the failure of the monitoring equipment at his home .
Our customer tells us that he signed a five year agreement February 18, 2005. On July 25 of this year, the family returned from a trip and found that their home was unprotected because the system was not functional. A serviceman dispatched by the company reportedly said the "main box was burned out" and referred to this equipment failure as "an Act of God". He also demanded payment of $300 to restore the system and refused to guarantee that the problem would not be repeated. Given Slomins' inability to repair the unit and guarantee their work, our customer requested that they be released from their agreement. This request was sent July 28, 2006 by registered letter. Instead of the $300 repair fee, they were instead told that they would have to pay more than $900 to be released from the agreement.
Full details of this complaint were sent to the company's senior management in August 2006, yet they still had not answered. As part of Consumer Help Web's complaint resolution service, our customer was given a referral to the local government consumer regulatory agency and a second referral to a local consumer attorney.
Movie Download Crackdown
A man who supplied the peer-to-peer network formerly known as BitTorrent with a copy of the final Star Wars movie pleaded guilty to a count of copyright infringement and one count of criminal copyright infringement. He faces up to five years in prison, a fine of $250,000, and three years of supervised release.
A man who supplied the peer-to-peer network formerly known as BitTorrent with a copy of the final Star Wars movie pleaded guilty to a count of copyright infringement and one count of criminal copyright infringement. He faces up to five years in prison, a fine of $250,000, and three years of supervised release.
"This groundbreaking case demonstrates the commitment of the Department of Justice to prosecute individuals who use new technologies to undermine the copyright laws," said U.S. Attorney Buchanan. "It also serves as an example to those who believe that there is anonymity in cyberspace."
This is the first criminal enforcement action against copyright infringement on a P2P network using BitTorrent technology. McCausland’s conviction is the third in a series of convictions arising from Operation D-Elite, a federal crackdown against the first providers (or suppliers) of pirated works to the technologically-sophisticated P2P network known as Elite Torrents. At its prime, the Elite Torrents network attracted more than 133,000 members and facilitated the illegal distribution of more than 2 million copies of movies, software, music, and games. On May 25, 2005, federal agents shut down the Elite Torrents network by seizing its main server and replacing its log-in web page with the following notice: "This Site Has Been Permanently Shut Down by the FBI and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)." Within the first week alone, this message was viewed over half a million times.
Pier 1 Recalls TV Stand One Day After Tipping Warning
Just a day after the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission warned consumers about the dangers of furniture or TV stands tipping, Pier 1 imports has voluntarily recalled 4,300 Ming TV stands.
The retailer said that it did not have any reports of injuries in the United States, but had learned of the death of a Canadian child when a television fell off the stand.
The Ming TV Stand, SKU 2065368, is a brown wooden cabinet that sits directly on the floor and measures 35 1/2-inches wide, 17 3/4-inches deep and 23 1/2-inches high. The TV stand contains an open storage space between its top shelve and its single bottom drawer. Consumers should immediately remove televisions or other heavy items from these TV stands. The stands should be returned to a Pier 1 Imports store for a refund or merchandise credit.
Consumers can also call Pier 1 Customer Service at (800) 245-4595, prompt 6, between 8 a.m. and 11 p.m. central day Monday through Saturday and 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. on Sundays.
Just a day after the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission warned consumers about the dangers of furniture or TV stands tipping, Pier 1 imports has voluntarily recalled 4,300 Ming TV stands.
The retailer said that it did not have any reports of injuries in the United States, but had learned of the death of a Canadian child when a television fell off the stand.
The Ming TV Stand, SKU 2065368, is a brown wooden cabinet that sits directly on the floor and measures 35 1/2-inches wide, 17 3/4-inches deep and 23 1/2-inches high. The TV stand contains an open storage space between its top shelve and its single bottom drawer. Consumers should immediately remove televisions or other heavy items from these TV stands. The stands should be returned to a Pier 1 Imports store for a refund or merchandise credit.
Consumers can also call Pier 1 Customer Service at (800) 245-4595, prompt 6, between 8 a.m. and 11 p.m. central day Monday through Saturday and 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. on Sundays.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Federal Gov't Joins Case Against Dey
The United States has intervened in a whistleblower suit filed in the District of Massachusetts against Dey, Inc. alleging that the company violated the False Claims Act, the Justice Department announced today. In its complaint, the government alleges that Dey engaged in a scheme to report fraudulent and inflated prices for several pharmaceutical products, knowing that federal healthcare programs established reimbursement rates based on those reported prices.
The United States has intervened in a whistleblower suit filed in the District of Massachusetts against Dey, Inc. alleging that the company violated the False Claims Act, the Justice Department announced today. In its complaint, the government alleges that Dey engaged in a scheme to report fraudulent and inflated prices for several pharmaceutical products, knowing that federal healthcare programs established reimbursement rates based on those reported prices.
The government's complaint alleges that the pharmaceutical manufacturer from at least on or before January 1, 1993 reported prices that were more than five times (500 percent) the actual sales prices on many of the drugs it manufactures. The United States alleges that Medicare and Medicaid have reimbursed Dey's customers in excess of $500 million for the drugs which are the subject of the complaint. Dey sells generic drugs that are reimbursed by the two federal health care programs.
The difference between the inflated government reimbursement rates and the actual price paid by healthcare providers for a drug is referred to as the "spread." The larger the spread on a drug, the larger the profit or return on investment for the provider. The government alleges that Dey used artificially inflated spreads to market, promote and sell the drugs to existing and potential customers. Because reimbursement from federal programs was based on the fraudulent inflated prices, the United States contends that Dey caused false and fraudulent claims to be submitted to federal healthcare programs.
The investigation began after the filing of a civil False Claims Act suit by a Florida home-infusion company, Ven-A-Care of the Florida Keys Inc. and its principals. The False Claims Act allows for private persons to file whistleblower suits to provide the government information about wrongdoing. Under the statute, if it is established that a person has submitted or caused others to submit false or fraudulent claims to the United States, the government can recover treble damages and $5,500 to $11,000 for each false or fraudulent claim filed. If the government is successful in resolving or litigating its claims, the whistleblower who initiated the action can receive a share of between 15 percent to 25 percent of the amount recovered.
Magazine Seller Fined $7 Million, Banned From Telemarketing 5 Years
A federal judge has ordered a magazine subscription seller to pay a civil penalty of more than $5.4 million and give up more than $1.6 million of his ill-gotten gains for violating a 1996 Federal Trade Commission consent order and the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR). This is the largest civil penalty the Federal Trade Commission has ever obtained for a violation of a consent order in a consumer protection matter.
“The FTC expects full compliance with its orders, period,” said Lydia Parnes, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “This case demonstrates that the Commission will prosecute those who flout its orders and deceive consumers.”
Based on an FTC complaint filed by the U.S. Department of Justice, the court entered a judgment against Richard L. Prochnow of Atlanta. The court had found that Prochnow violated the consent order through his ownership and control of Direct Sales International (DSI), which either directly or through its dealers: (1) failed to disclose or misled consumers regarding the cost of magazine packages and individual magazines; and (2) made weekly cost representations even though consumers could not make weekly payments for the magazine packages.
The court also held Prochnow liable for DSI’s failure to tell consumers that their credit cards would be billed for membership in a buying club unless they called within thirty days to cancel, and its failure to provide consumers with information that would enable them to cancel, in violation of the TSR. The court further found Prochnow liable for false statements to consumers that publishers were paid in advance for magazines, which the Court found to be a violation of the TSR.
The court ordered that, with a few narrow exceptions, Prochnow may not own, control, manage, advise, or assist others engaged in a telemarketing business for five years. This ban does not apply to his ownership in Amerinet, a company that processes payments to telemarketers, and Hotdogger, an infomercial company, provided he does not exercise any control over the companies and places his interest in them in the custody and control of an independent third party approved by the court. During the next five years, he must provide the FTC with quarterly reports on his business dealings, and provide copies of the order to heads of non-publicly traded companies in which he has ownership.
In holding Prochnow personally liable for the violations, the court found that he had the authority to control the practices of DSI’s employees and those of the dealers selling magazine subscriptions pursuant to contracts with DSI. The violations of the consent order and the TSR occurred between April 1997 and January 2000, when Prochnow sold DSI. The consent order, which prohibited Prochnow from using deceptive practices to sell magazine subscriptions, had settled FTC charges against Prochnow, then doing business as DSI, and several other corporate and individual parties.
CPSC Warns about TV, Large Furniture Tip-Over Dangers
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is warning parents and caregivers about the dangers of televisions and heavy furniture tipping over and killing young children. The number of TV tip-over deaths reported to CPSC during the first seven months of 2006 is twice the typical yearly average.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is warning parents and caregivers about the dangers of televisions and heavy furniture tipping over and killing young children. The number of TV tip-over deaths reported to CPSC during the first seven months of 2006 is twice the typical yearly average.
"There are usually five deaths reported to CPSC each year caused by televisions tipping over onto young children, but we are aware of 10 deaths already in 2006," said CPSC Acting Chairman Nancy Nord. "We are issuing this warning so parents will take the necessary steps to prevent any more of these tragedies."
These deaths and injuries frequently occur when children climb onto, fall against or pull themselves up on television stands, shelves, bookcases, dressers, desks and chests. In some cases, televisions placed on top of furniture tip over and cause a child to suffer traumatic and sometimes fatal injuries.
From 2000 through 2005, CPSC has reports of 36 TV tip-over-related deaths and 65 furniture tip-over deaths. More than 80 percent of all these deaths involved young children. Additionally, CPSC estimates that in 2005 at least 3,000 children younger than 5 were treated in U.S. hospital emergency rooms because of injuries associated with TV tip-overs.
Industry standards require that TV stands, chests, bureaus and dressers pass a stability test. If a piece of furniture violates these standards, the product can be subject to a safety recall.
To help prevent tip-over hazards, CPSC offers the following safety tips:
- Verify that furniture is stable on its own. For added security, anchor to the floor or attach to the wall all entertainment units, TV stands, bookcases, shelving and bureaus to the wall using appropriate hardware, such as brackets, screws, or toggles.
- Place televisions on sturdy furniture appropriate for the size of the TV or on a low-rise basPush the TV as far back as possible from the front of its stand
- Place electrical cords out of a child's reach, and teach children not to play with the cords
- Remove items that might tempt kids to climb, such as toys and remote controls, from the top of the TV and furniture.
To download CPSC's new safety alert "Preventing TV and Furniture Tip-Over Deaths," visit http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/5004.pdf
Monday, September 11, 2006
IBackups.Net Operator Sentenced To Prison, Massive Fine
The owner of a massive for-profit software piracy Web site was sentenced last week in federal court to 87 months in prison, Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher of the Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg of the Eastern District of Virginia announced.
Nathan L. Peterson, 27, of Antelope Acres, Calif. was also ordered by Judge T.S. Ellis, III of the Eastern District of Virginia to forfeit the proceeds of his illegal conduct and pay restitution of more than $5.4 million. The forfeiture involves a wide array of assets, including homes, numerous cars, and a boat, which Peterson had purchased with the profits from his company.
The sentence is the second recent major prison sentence received for software piracy. In August 2006, Danny Ferrer, 37, the operator of www.BuysUSA.com, received a six- year prison sentence. Peterson is believed to be the most prolific online commercial distributor of pirated software ever convicted in the United States, the Department said. "This defendant lined his pockets by stealing the hard work of others," said Fisher. "Today's sentence sends a clear message that those who sell pirated software will be convicted and punished."
Beginning in 2003, and continuing until its shutdown by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in February 2005, Peterson operated the www.ibackups.net website which sold copies of software products that were copyrighted by companies such as Adobe Systems, Inc., Macromedia Inc., Microsoft Corporation, Sonic Solutions, and Symantec Corporation at prices substantially below the suggested retail price. The software products purchased on Peterson's website were reproduced and distributed either by instantaneous computer download of an electronic copy and/or by shipment through the mail on CDs. Peterson often included a serial number that allowed the purchaser to activate and use the product.
"Stealing the intellectual property of others is always a bad idea in any context. It's theft. And, so, a sentence of seven plus years in prison and restitution of $5.4 million is richly deserved," said Rosenberg.
The investigation was conducted by agents of the FBI's Washington Field Office. After receiving complaints from copyright holders about Peterson's website, an undercover FBI agent made a number of purchases of business and utility software from the site, which were delivered over the Internet and by mail to addresses in northern Virginia.
As a result of the FBI's investigation, Peterson's website was taken down in February 2005. Further investigation established that, during the time of its operation, www.ibackups.net illegally sold more than $5.4 million of copyrighted software. These sales resulted in losses to the owners of the underlying copyrighted products of nearly $20 million.
Peterson used the proceeds of his illegal conduct to fund an extravagant lifestyle, including the purchases of multiple homes, cars, and a boat. The government seized numerous assets from Peterson including: a number of bank and trading accounts, a fully restored 1949 Mercury Coupe purchased originally for $44,000, a 2005 Dodge Ram, a 2003 Chevrolet Corvette, a 2004 Toyota Camry, a 2005 Toyota Corolla, and a 2006 Mercedes-Benz S-Class purchased for $125,000.
Peterson pleaded guilty before Judge Ellis on Dec. 13, 2005, to two counts of criminal copyright infringement for selling pirated software. While awaiting sentencing in this case, Peterson was arrested, convicted, and sentenced in California on state gun charges resulting from an investigation by the Los Angeles Police Department. He was sentenced on June 1, 2006, to 16 months of incarceration on those charges. Federal prosecutors then sought his return to the Eastern District of Virginia for sentencing on the federal charges.
The owner of a massive for-profit software piracy Web site was sentenced last week in federal court to 87 months in prison, Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher of the Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg of the Eastern District of Virginia announced.
Nathan L. Peterson, 27, of Antelope Acres, Calif. was also ordered by Judge T.S. Ellis, III of the Eastern District of Virginia to forfeit the proceeds of his illegal conduct and pay restitution of more than $5.4 million. The forfeiture involves a wide array of assets, including homes, numerous cars, and a boat, which Peterson had purchased with the profits from his company.
The sentence is the second recent major prison sentence received for software piracy. In August 2006, Danny Ferrer, 37, the operator of www.BuysUSA.com, received a six- year prison sentence. Peterson is believed to be the most prolific online commercial distributor of pirated software ever convicted in the United States, the Department said. "This defendant lined his pockets by stealing the hard work of others," said Fisher. "Today's sentence sends a clear message that those who sell pirated software will be convicted and punished."
Beginning in 2003, and continuing until its shutdown by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in February 2005, Peterson operated the www.ibackups.net website which sold copies of software products that were copyrighted by companies such as Adobe Systems, Inc., Macromedia Inc., Microsoft Corporation, Sonic Solutions, and Symantec Corporation at prices substantially below the suggested retail price. The software products purchased on Peterson's website were reproduced and distributed either by instantaneous computer download of an electronic copy and/or by shipment through the mail on CDs. Peterson often included a serial number that allowed the purchaser to activate and use the product.
"Stealing the intellectual property of others is always a bad idea in any context. It's theft. And, so, a sentence of seven plus years in prison and restitution of $5.4 million is richly deserved," said Rosenberg.
The investigation was conducted by agents of the FBI's Washington Field Office. After receiving complaints from copyright holders about Peterson's website, an undercover FBI agent made a number of purchases of business and utility software from the site, which were delivered over the Internet and by mail to addresses in northern Virginia.
As a result of the FBI's investigation, Peterson's website was taken down in February 2005. Further investigation established that, during the time of its operation, www.ibackups.net illegally sold more than $5.4 million of copyrighted software. These sales resulted in losses to the owners of the underlying copyrighted products of nearly $20 million.
Peterson used the proceeds of his illegal conduct to fund an extravagant lifestyle, including the purchases of multiple homes, cars, and a boat. The government seized numerous assets from Peterson including: a number of bank and trading accounts, a fully restored 1949 Mercury Coupe purchased originally for $44,000, a 2005 Dodge Ram, a 2003 Chevrolet Corvette, a 2004 Toyota Camry, a 2005 Toyota Corolla, and a 2006 Mercedes-Benz S-Class purchased for $125,000.
Peterson pleaded guilty before Judge Ellis on Dec. 13, 2005, to two counts of criminal copyright infringement for selling pirated software. While awaiting sentencing in this case, Peterson was arrested, convicted, and sentenced in California on state gun charges resulting from an investigation by the Los Angeles Police Department. He was sentenced on June 1, 2006, to 16 months of incarceration on those charges. Federal prosecutors then sought his return to the Eastern District of Virginia for sentencing on the federal charges.
Feds Force Car Window Sticker Change, "Stars on Cars" Rule Now Law
Manufacturers will display the government's star safety ratings on every new vehicle with a price sticker, according to a federal rule made final September 7 in Washington, DC. The rule announced by National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator Nicole Nason and Ohio Senator Mike DeWine, provides for an expanded window sticker meant to provide consumers with safety rating information about new vehicles.
The rule requires that NHTSA’s star safety rating information be displayed on part of the window sticker on new cars beginning with the 2008 model year. Consumers will be able to measure the safety information by the number of stars on the sticker.
The new vehicle price stickers will contain NHTSA safety ratings in three areas – front and side crash and non-destructive rollover tests. All three tests use the five-star rating, with five stars being the safest.
“Senator DeWine, a strong advocate for highway safety, has done a great service for consumers by demanding that vehicle safety information be included on the sticker as well,” said Nason. “By making safety a selling point, it is my hope that this rule will encourage the faster development of these kinds of technologies.”
Senator DeWine was the sponsor of the legislation creating the “Stars on Cars” program, which was included in the 2005 highway bill. "This measure just makes sense. By placing safety ratings directly on new car window stickers, consumers will have the ability to make more informed decisions right there on the car sales lot," said Senator DeWine.
Manufacturers will display the government's star safety ratings on every new vehicle with a price sticker, according to a federal rule made final September 7 in Washington, DC. The rule announced by National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator Nicole Nason and Ohio Senator Mike DeWine, provides for an expanded window sticker meant to provide consumers with safety rating information about new vehicles.
The rule requires that NHTSA’s star safety rating information be displayed on part of the window sticker on new cars beginning with the 2008 model year. Consumers will be able to measure the safety information by the number of stars on the sticker.
The new vehicle price stickers will contain NHTSA safety ratings in three areas – front and side crash and non-destructive rollover tests. All three tests use the five-star rating, with five stars being the safest.
“Senator DeWine, a strong advocate for highway safety, has done a great service for consumers by demanding that vehicle safety information be included on the sticker as well,” said Nason. “By making safety a selling point, it is my hope that this rule will encourage the faster development of these kinds of technologies.”
Senator DeWine was the sponsor of the legislation creating the “Stars on Cars” program, which was included in the 2005 highway bill. "This measure just makes sense. By placing safety ratings directly on new car window stickers, consumers will have the ability to make more informed decisions right there on the car sales lot," said Senator DeWine.
Washington A.G. Settles CompuVest Complaints
Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna has announced a settlement with CompuVest, a Renton, WA-based corporation that sells computers via the Internet. The company will refund consumers and pay more than $20,000 to resolve allegations that it failed to honor warranties and misrepresented its products and return policies.
"Businesses have an obligation to fully disclose all terms in their return policies and warranties and honor those guarantees," McKenna said. "The Attorney General's Office alerted CompuVest to our concerns more than a year ago, but customers continued to complain that they were charged fees for returning wrong orders and failed to receive full refunds or replacements for defective products."
CompuVest sells new, used and refurbished computers and other electronics online.
McKenna said the agreement filed in King County Superior Court does not include an admission or finding of wrongdoing, but helps assure CompuVest complies with the Consumer Protection Act. The company will pay $50,000 in civil penalties, with $40,000 suspended on condition that it comply with the settlement terms, and approximately $12,300 in legal costs and attorneys' fees.
"CompuVest agrees to disclose its return policies, honor warranties and accurately describe products. The company will also refund consumers who have filed complaints with our office," McKenna said.
Today's agreement concludes an investigation by the Attorney General's Consumer Protection High-Tech Unit.
According to the state's complaint, CompuVest's return policy indicated that customers would be charged a 15 percent restocking fee for returned merchandise that is not defective. But the policy failed to state that the company would test returned items and charge a restocking fee and shipping fees for those it declared to be operable. The suit alleges that numerous customers who returned defective items were charged such fees. Customers were denied replacements for items still under warranty and told they would have to pay to have the item returned.
The state also alleged that CompuVest failed to deliver items when promised or make timely refunds for items that weren't received. Product descriptions and compatibility information included misrepresentations; in some cases, products described as new were actually used or refurbished.
The Attorney General's Office has received approximately 25 consumer complaints about CompuVest since the end of 2001. The Better Business Bureau also received complaints.
The agreement requires CompuVest to refund or otherwise adjust consumer complaints filed with the Attorney General's Office since January 2005 and those received during the next 180 days.
Consumers who believe they are entitled to a refund should file a complaint with the Attorney General's Office online at www.atg.wa.gov or call 1-800-551-4636 to request a complaint form. (Toll-free number only available in Washington state.)
Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna has announced a settlement with CompuVest, a Renton, WA-based corporation that sells computers via the Internet. The company will refund consumers and pay more than $20,000 to resolve allegations that it failed to honor warranties and misrepresented its products and return policies.
"Businesses have an obligation to fully disclose all terms in their return policies and warranties and honor those guarantees," McKenna said. "The Attorney General's Office alerted CompuVest to our concerns more than a year ago, but customers continued to complain that they were charged fees for returning wrong orders and failed to receive full refunds or replacements for defective products."
CompuVest sells new, used and refurbished computers and other electronics online.
McKenna said the agreement filed in King County Superior Court does not include an admission or finding of wrongdoing, but helps assure CompuVest complies with the Consumer Protection Act. The company will pay $50,000 in civil penalties, with $40,000 suspended on condition that it comply with the settlement terms, and approximately $12,300 in legal costs and attorneys' fees.
"CompuVest agrees to disclose its return policies, honor warranties and accurately describe products. The company will also refund consumers who have filed complaints with our office," McKenna said.
Today's agreement concludes an investigation by the Attorney General's Consumer Protection High-Tech Unit.
According to the state's complaint, CompuVest's return policy indicated that customers would be charged a 15 percent restocking fee for returned merchandise that is not defective. But the policy failed to state that the company would test returned items and charge a restocking fee and shipping fees for those it declared to be operable. The suit alleges that numerous customers who returned defective items were charged such fees. Customers were denied replacements for items still under warranty and told they would have to pay to have the item returned.
The state also alleged that CompuVest failed to deliver items when promised or make timely refunds for items that weren't received. Product descriptions and compatibility information included misrepresentations; in some cases, products described as new were actually used or refurbished.
The Attorney General's Office has received approximately 25 consumer complaints about CompuVest since the end of 2001. The Better Business Bureau also received complaints.
The agreement requires CompuVest to refund or otherwise adjust consumer complaints filed with the Attorney General's Office since January 2005 and those received during the next 180 days.
Consumers who believe they are entitled to a refund should file a complaint with the Attorney General's Office online at www.atg.wa.gov or call 1-800-551-4636 to request a complaint form. (Toll-free number only available in Washington state.)
