Details On The FTC's DRM Workshop

from the don't-miss-it dept

At the beginning of January we noted -- with some amount of surprise -- that it appeared that the FTC was preparing a workshop on DRM. When I was in Washington, DC recently, I had the chance to meet some of the folks putting that workshop together, and now they've sent over a more detailed list of topics up for discussion at the session, and it does seem like a pretty good list -- covering pretty much the entire range of questions concerning DRM, specifically from a consumer perspective. It's definitely an encouraging sign that folks at the FTC are recognizing that DRM can be used to do harm, rather than just (as the industry would have you believe) to "open up new business models."

Filed Under: drm, ftc, protection
Companies: ftc

Companies To Be Held Liable For Selling To Online Criminals

from the seems-a-bit-extreme dept

One of the reasons why various safe harbor rules exist is to protect parties who really have nothing to do with any kind of law breaking from being liable for the activities of others. Thus, we don't blame an ISP for the activities of one of its users, even if that user breaks the law. That's both reasonable and fair. Those who want to blame those providers often do so just because it's easier -- or, more commonly, because they somehow think it's better for that service provider to somehow act in the role of the police to make things easier. Something similar seems to be happening with the FTC placing the onus on small businesses to make sure they don't sell to online criminals. Slashdot points us to the news that, starting November 1st, all companies are supposed to compare customer info with a "red flag" list of online identity fraudsters and money launderers. Firms that fail to check may be liable if they end up doing business with "known" criminals. You can understand the reasoning here. It certainly makes it a lot easier for the FTC to try to crack down on these crimes. But it adds significant expense and liability to small businesses for potential crimes in which they were totally uninvolved.

Filed Under: ftc, identity fraud, liability, online criminals, red flag, safe harbors
Companies: ftc

Court Overturns FTC Ruling Against Rambus

from the bad-news-all-around dept

We've been covering the story of Rambus' tricks to get itself a patent that covered a standard by sitting in on standards meetings and then modifying its patents to cover the standard. The rulings on the various lawsuits have gone back and forth on this, and while Rambus has had some wins and some losses in court, last year the FTC stepped in and smacked the company down, noting that it had used questionable means to get itself an effective monopoly on the memory market. Unfortunately, that FTC ruling has now been overturned by an appeals court that said the FTC failed to show evidence of a monopoly. This is unfortunate for a variety of reasons. If the FTC's ruling had been allowed to stand, it would have shown how an ill-gotten patent would be the equivalent of an illegal monopoly. That seems like the proper result, as a patent clearly is a government granted monopoly. So, if the patent is gained through questionable means, then that monopoly should be considered an illegal monopoly. Unfortunately the appeals court disagreed, and that will make us all worse off, as it will give the government fewer tools to crack down on abusers of the patent system.

Filed Under: antitrust, ftc, monopolies, patents, standards
Companies: ftc, rambus

FTC Notices That Diet Pill Spammer's Diet Pills Don't Work

from the next-thing-you-know,-they'll-be-telling-us-that-the-moon-isn't-made-of-cheese dept

Last week, the FTC announced that a judge had shut down the operation of a diet pill spammer after it turned out (shockingly, we know) that the claims made by the spammers about the pills were either completely false or (at best) unsubstantiated. While the spammers were in violation of the CAN SPAM law, it would seem that they should be in violation of other fraud regulations as well, such as false advertising. Of course, with so much spamming going overseas these days, perhaps what's more amazing is that these guys were in the US and it was possible to find them in order to shut them down. We're sure someone somewhat less easily shut down will quickly fill in the void.

Filed Under: diet pills, ftc, spam
Companies: ftc

Cramming Scammers Apparently Spent All Their Money -- Paying Back 5% Of The Money Taken

from the that's-all-they-can-afford dept

We haven't heard much about cramming scams lately, but they still happen all the time. For those who don't know, cramming is when a third party company either illegally gets additional charges on your telephone bill or (more often) tricks you into agreeing to more charges on your phone bill. Four years ago, we wrote about some of the tricks used in cramming call centers, where they pretend they're just "verifying" information -- and then bundle a whole bunch of questions together, tricking people into saying yes to all of the questions, when they really mean to say yes to the last question. The companies later use those recordings (sometimes edited) to prove to people that they "approved" the charges and refuse to cancel the charges or refund the money. Various state governments and the FTC have tried cracking down on these companies for a while, and the FTC went after a bunch last summer -- which has resulted in a settlement. Unfortunately, while the companies took people for $24.7 million, they're only paying back $1.2 million (and not admitting any guilt). Apparently, the firms claim that the $1.2 million is all they can afford. Apparently lesson one if you're going to scam a bunch of people is to spend all that money before the authorities catch up with you.

Filed Under: cramming
Companies: ftc