Federal Trade Commission
Federal Trade Commission | Protecting America's Consumers
Federal Trade Commission
Federal Trade Commission | Protecting America's Consumers
Protect Net Neutrality from the Trump Administration
The internet has helped to boost the economy, create an amazing tool for educators, and provides an outlet for communication with people all over the world. However, the simple policy that keeps the internet a strangely level-playing field (and the internet itself) is under fire from both the Trump administration and service providers like Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon. Sign this petition to call on the FCC to protect net neutrality under the Trump administration. Net neutrality regulations are set to stop ISPs like the big cable and phone companies from favoring/crippling certain websites and services for their own benefit and monetary gain. These rulings could be reversed as Republicans look to deregulate private industries. As a junior in high school, I can appreciate the need to be able to complete homework, communicate, and access streaming media like Netflix without an ISP slowing down my traffic. In the 21st century, internet is like running water, electricity, or transportation. Those without neutral access to it are at a major disadvantage. If net neutrality goes away, the internet will become distorted, and your access to certain content will be based upon your ISP's financial interests and what you're willing to pay, like cable television, hurting the consumer. Let's stop the telecom lobbyists who buy their influence, and the private companies who already control so much of our media before it is too late.
In an unprecedented breach, Equifax allowed nearly 150 million Americans to become vulnerable. That is 1-in-2. Simply put, you are most likely affected. Equifax could not adequately protect the social security numbers, home addresses, and drivers license numbers of the many Americans who were forced to trust them. Not only that, but we witnessed Equifax company executives using the hack to sell their stock in their company and making millions of dollars in the process. We demand an investigation into the matter and we demand an answer to the following questions:-How invasive was the breach?-How extensive was the breach?-Who was involved in the breach?-What reforms will be taken so that this does not happen again? We also demand that that the executives who knew about the hack beforehand, and especially those who sold stock, be questioned and investigated. This needs to be addressed. Please share and continue to spread the word. (Follow @TheAnonJournal for immediate updates on this matter - theanonjournal.org)
Stop Price Gauging Emergency Vet Services
Mars Inc. owns a great majority of pet care services and other pet related brands like Pedigree, Royal Canin, Ceser, Banfield, IAMS, Eukanuba, Sheba, Temptations, and Whiskas (and more!). Due to the monopoly that Mars Inc. has, they are able to set unreasonable rates for emergency vet care. I started this petition almost 6 months ago after spending over 7K to try and save my dog from what started out as just vomiting. During this journey I have literally heard from thousands of people who share my same experience. My heart breaks for them as much as it breaks for the loss of my sweet Ava. I implore every reader to research your animal care before an emergency strikes. Know your options! Mars Inc. does not acknowledge your complaints outside having a canned customer service representative contact you. If they truly cared about animals they would be working to fix their reputation and to save animals. Unfortunately, as of April 2017, Mars Inc.is in the process of purchasing VCA, another emergency provider. So your options are becoming more limited. Below is my story ______________________________ I recently took my 8-year-old Chihuahua to Blue Pearl, one of the largest chains of veterinary clinics in the United States. My beautiful dog was sick and I just wanted answers. Over the course of 3 days so many options and tests were thrown my way. It was hard to digest what was needed and to know if I was making the right choices for my beloved pet while weighing the financial costs. It was a pet owner’s worst nightmare. I ended up racking up over $7,000 dollars in debt and still lost one of my best friends. This experience has opened my eyes to the lack of government oversight and regulations of veterinarian clinics. Companies like Blue Pearl, owned by MARS Incorporated, have shown an inability to police themselves. It’s time they put pets over profits. As a first step, I’m asking that all proposed tests and procedures have the costs, benefits, and risks be provided to pet owners in writing. This will allow for people like myself to have in writing what we are being told, be able to weigh our options better, and get a second opinion if needed. Had I had in writing the options being told to me, I’m not sure if I would have made the same choices, but in such a horrible moment I would have felt more informed. Blue Pearl and other clinics won’t do this on their own, and regulations vary greatly by state. That is why I am calling on Congress to make this a national requirement. The love of animals and our family pets is a bipartisan issue, and I believe we can get our Congressional leaders to act.
To have people file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission
This is to all who ordered from the brand called Anti Social Social Club, which I will refer to as 'the brand', in the late October. Two months have elapsed and the brand still does not fulfill the orders. Furthermore, the owner of the brand, Neek Lurk, continues to upload his Instagram pictures without any concern for the customers. He does not respond to thousand of messages asking him to notify the situation. The email address is the automated one, and unreachable. The Shipping Info on the website states that: "After checkout once the order is confirmed we will send you a notification as soon as the item is shipped with tracking Please allow 7-14 Business days of shipping & handling Please allow 5-10 days for delivery Due to the high demand of items, orders will be fulfilled in the order they are received, and therefore may sell out before a certain item is processed. We use USPS for domestic orders (USA) & DHL for international (Worldwide)" However, the brand is unable to fulfill this policy. Furthermore, the brand is also in a clear violation of the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) Mail, Internet, or Telephone Order Merchandise Rule. According to FindLaw, "if the business is unable to ship within the promised time or within 30 days, the merchant must promptly tell the customer by mail, telephone or email, and give a new shipping estimate and give the customer a chance to cancel their order and receive a full refund. This offer to cancel or accept the new shipping date must give the customer sufficient time to make a decision. In other words, you can't call to inform a customer you can't make a shipping time and then demand an immediate answer." The punishment is as follows: "Enforcement The FTC has wide ranging powers to enforce the 30-Day Rule. Businesses can be sued by the FTC for injunctive relief, damages of up to $16,000 per violation, and redress for the consumer. Additionally, state and local agencies can sue you for violating consumer protection laws." This applies to the Internet order as well. Therefore, we urge the people to file this petition so that the brand does not continue to practice this kind of bad business. Thank you.
Stop health authorities claiming that vaccines are ‘safe’
This petition is neither pro- nor anti-vaccination. It aims instead to show health professionals, health authorities and governments the public desire for greater honesty over the communication of scientific knowledge about vaccine safety prior to vaccination consent being given. Vaccination is a form of medical treatment. International and European Union human rights law  requires that everyone, with very limited exceptions, must give consent before receiving a medical treatment. Informed consent means that all relevant information should be available before someone is asked to decide about their own, or their child’s, vaccination. This should include the known benefits and risks, as well as any alternatives, to the proposed treatment. In most cases, this simply doesn’t happen. Members of the public, parents and children are instead generally told by health authorities, doctors or nurses that vaccines are both safe and effective. These views are not supported by the available scientific facts and amount to the public being misled meaning that consent is often misinformed rather than informed. Health authorities responsible for communicating vaccine safety have been found to conceal information that is of paramount relevance to public health. This has been shown in the UK, Sweden, the USA  and in other countries. While the risk of permanent injury from vaccines following any single vaccination is small, the overall risk of the full vaccination schedule to any child is not well understood and thousands of people have suffered long-term injuries and even death that have been attributed to vaccinations by courts in the USA and elsewhere. Vaccine manufacturers have made governments liable for vaccine injuries through compensation programs that have now been established in 29 countries . In the USA, $3.5 billion has been paid out in compensation as a result of vaccine injury since 1988. This includes 16,616 cases of vaccine injury and 1,219 vaccine-related deaths, of which 993 injuries and 59 deaths are from the MMR vaccine alone. The UK government is presently trying to appeal a court decision in order to relieve itself of liability from vaccine injuries linked to the Pandemrix swine flu vaccine. There are over 1300 cases in the USA where compensation has been paid to people who have suffered vaccine-related brain damage (encephalopathy). Serious gastrointestinal reactions have been found to be related to certain vaccines, including rotavirus. Vaccine side effects are classified by government regulators according to frequency as follows: ‘Very common’ (≥1/10), ‘common’ (≥1/100 to <1/10), ‘uncommon’ (≥1/1,000 to <1/100). The known rates of side effects, that may be underreported in clinical trials conducted by vaccine manufacturers, are generally not communicated to parents or children. Examples of reported side effects in EU licensing authorisations for Cervarix, Gardasil and MMR are referenced below.[12, 13, 14] Given the very high number of children vaccinated each year, large numbers of children can be seriously and unpredictably affected even when side effects are considered ‘uncommon’, with children sometimes suffering long-term, debilitating or even life-threatening illnesses. Governments, health authorities and health professionals have a duty of care to communicate all available, relevant information to parents, guardians or children prior to vaccination consent being given. Sign this petition if you feel that governments, health authorities and health professionals should have a duty of care to the public and so must stop claiming that vaccines are ‘safe’. They must also not withhold relevant information about vaccine safety that obstructs informed consent. References 1. Article 3(2)(a), Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:12012P/TXT&from=en 2. Understanding informed consent – a primer (FindLaw®): http://healthcare.findlaw.com/patient-rights/understanding-informed-consent-a-primer.html 3. Gallagher P, “Thousands of teenage girls report feeling seriously ill after routine school cancer vaccination”, The Independent. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/thousands-of-teenage-girls-report-feeling-seriously-ill-after-routine-school-cancer-vaccination-10286876.html 4. ANH-Intl, “Swedish cover-up of HPV vaccine side effects—and more”, 4 Nov 2015. http://anhinternational.org/2015/11/04/swedish-cover-hpv-vaccine-side-effects 5. Beck, S. “Vaxxed: Why we should be allowed to watch the movie.” 22 Feb 2017. http://anhinternational.org/2017/02/22/vaxxed-allowed-watch-movie 6. ANH-Intl. “It’s official: HPV vaccine, the most dangerous vaccine yet.” 18 Jan 2017. http://anhinternational.org/2017/01/18/official-hpv-vaccine-vaccine-dangerous-yet 7. Looker C, Kelly H. “No-fault compensation following adverse events attributed to vaccination: a review of international programmes”. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 2011; 89: 371-378. http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/89/5/10-081901/en/ 8. HRSA, Vaccine Injury Compensation Data, updated 1 Feb 2017. https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/data/vicpmonthlyreporttemplate2_1_17.pdf 9. UK Department of Work and Pensions case with Pandemrix (2017): https://www.hja.net/press-releases/dwps-pandemrix-vaccine-injury-appeal-set-impact-future-compensation-claims 10. Attkisson S. “Vaccines, Autism and Brain Damage: What's in a Name?” CBS News, 14 Sept 2010. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/vaccines-autism-and-brain-damage-whats-in-a-name/ 11. Geier DA, Geier MR. Gastrointestinal reactions and rotavirus vaccination based upon analysis of the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database for 1999. Hepatogastroenterology. 2004; 51(56): 465-9. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15086184 12. Cervarix EU marketing authorisation: http://ec.europa.eu/health/documents/community-register/2011/2011022198968/anx_98968_en.pdf 13. Gardasil EU marketing authorisation: http://ec.europa.eu/health/documents/community-register/2010/2010081885368/anx_85368_en.pdf 14. MMR EU marketing authorisation: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Product_Information/human/000604/WC500030170.pdf
Require full disclosure of all ingredients in disposable diapers for babies
We all know that most babies can wear disposable diapers and be just fine. Most babies do wear disposable diapers and are just fine. Unfortunately, some babies are not just fine. If you have one of these babies, your heart is probably pounding reading these words. If you don't, you don't. That's ok. You should still keep reading. You'll find this interesting. Product labeling laws generally ensure that you, the consumer, know what you're buying. Baby clothing is labeled. Baby care items are labeled. Baby food is labeled. No matter what, you get to know, before you buy it, if your baby's pants are cotton or polyester. You get to choose what your baby wears. You know, before you buy them, what is in your baby wipes. You know what is in your baby food. You have a choice. By contrast, your baby's disposable diapers are virtually unlabeled. No textile labels. No ingredient lists. No disclosure. Lots of secrets. Very little regulation. No required testing beyond basic CPSIA tests for lead & phthalates. And when you ask for detailed information about what is in the diapers your baby is wearing, disposable diaper companies don't have to tell you anything. If you ask about your baby's shirt, there are no secrets.If you ask about your baby's pants, there are no secrets.If you ask about your baby's food, there are no secrets.It's on the label. The law says it has to be.Because your baby is wearing a disposable diaper, there are secrets. Baby diapers are not considered medical devices by the FDA. Unlike adult disposable diapers, baby diaper companies are not required to go through medical device testing to prove that disposable baby diapers are medically safe for a baby to wear. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=876.5920 Baby diapers are not regulated as cosmetics by the FDA. Baby diapers may contain ingredients (like petrolatum, oils, or other lotions) that are cosmetic ingredients and may be intended to help prevent diaper rash, keep a baby's skin soft, or prevent contact with wetness. Baby diaper companies generally do not provide parents with a full, detailed, INCI compliant list of ingredients in disposable diapers. https://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/Labeling/Regulations/ucm126444.htm Baby diapers are not considered clothing (garments) by the FTC. Specifically DISPOSABLE baby diapers are nearly the only thing worn by a human, other than a hat or a disposable menstrual pad, where product or package labeling isn't mandated by law to fully disclose the amount and type of materials used in the garment. Disposable baby diapers are one of the only garments worn by a baby not required by law to include care or content labels.https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/threading-your-way-through-labeling-requirements-under-textile#textile Why does this matter?Baby diapers are worn by babies, next to their genitals, for two to three years. Babies are exposed to everything in that diaper. Every fabric, woven or non-woven. Every chemical, intended or unintended. Nearly every other garment in our society has to be fully labeled. Everything. Even socks! Why aren't baby diapers fully labeled? Why don't we get to know everything our baby is being exposed to in a diaper? As a mom, you should get to know what is in your baby's diapers. If you want to avoid a certain ingredient, you should be able to avoid that ingredient. A disposable diaper is worn next to the skin and should be considered a garment. The composition of all textiles, woven or non-woven, should be disclosed on the packaging. If the diaper includes any chemical ingredients, a full INCI-compliant ingredient list should also be disclosed on the packaging. Babies are tiny with delicate, sensitive skin. Parents deserve to be active decision makers in their baby's care. Disposable diaper ingredients should not be kept secret from parents. What now?For your baby's sake, demand, today, that the FTC and the FDA eliminate product labeling exclusions for disposable baby diapers. Sign this petition. Tell them. #IGetToKnow what is in my baby's diapers.
Let parents control who can collect data from their kids
The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) is currently the only legislative tool available that keeps parents in control of what data and personal information companies can collect about children under 13 while they are online. The Federal Trade Commission has proposed rule changes that will update the law and keep parents in control even in this new digital era of social media networks, mobile apps, gaming sites and tracking that goes on while kids are web browsing. There is already mounting industry opposition to these rule changes which will provide parents with another tool to stay in control. Parents must make their voices heard so that the FTC knows that we support these important rule changes that keep parents in charge.
Equifax must give FREE credit protection & monitoring services and more for LIFE
For the duration of each person’s lifetime, Equifax must provide for FREE, unlimited security freeze and unfreeze at all credit bureaus, credit monitoring (detection and alert) at all credit bureaus, credit score on a monthly basis, counseling and resources to fully resolve identity theft, and reimburse for any money stolen due to the data and identity theft. On Thursday, Equifax disclosed that a data breach it discovered on July 29 may have impacted as many as 143 million consumers in the United States. This will certainly impact your or someone you know. The data that was stolen were things that we cannot easily change, such as social security numbers, date of birth, name, address, driver's license number, among other information. What can someone do with this information? They can steal your identity. They can open and use credit cards or obtain loans with your information, and ruin your credit. They can go buy a mobile phone and get mobile service, compliments of your identity, and the bills will go to you. They can steal your identity to take a job and elect not to withhold taxes so that you are on the hook for the taxes. They can file a tax return and make it look like you get a refund, but the refund will be sent to the thieves. They can use your information to obtain medical care from a doctor and hospital, get expensive drugs and medical equipment with the bills going to you, and possibly resulting in a denial of medical services to you because your limits have been reached. After the thieves use your information to steal from you, your credit will start to get impacted. Unpaid bills will go on your credit. In our credit based society, you need good credit to rent an apartment or house based, obtain a job, obtain a student loan, open lines of credit for a credit card or for your small business loan, etc. The stolen data will persist and will retain its value to the attackers for years to come because we cannot change information, such as our SSN, DOB, and our names. Identity thieves will ruin what we have worked so hard for. The data is extremely valuable and greatly impact our everyday lives and future lives. Don't forget that children's identities are also valuable because they have clean credit to start with and most parents don't monitor their children's credit. Imagine your child trying to obtain a student loan, or getting his first job or apartment, but being denied for identity theft that happened years before. Equifax was careless, negligent, and wreckless in their data security and now they only want to give the affected consumers 1 year of free credit monitoring, when they know full well how valuable the information is to the hackers and that the information is the key to our identities. Our personal data cannot be changed so identity theft can still take place years from now. The average victim spends nearly $500 and 30 hours resolving just one identity theft incident. Now consider how many credit cards can be applied for, how many mobile phones can be purchased, how many other things can and will happen during your life now that this information is out there in perpetuity and multiply this by the cost and time averages. Equifax must make this right by providing each service for free, for the duration of each person’s lifetime: Security freeze and unfreeze with all credit bureaus (unlimited), Credit monitoring (detection and alert) with all credit bureaus through a third party (Equifax cannot provide the detection and alert because Equifax cannot be trusted), Credit score on a monthly basis from all credit bureaus, Counseling and resources to fully resolve identity theft (through a third party because Equifax cannot be trusted), and Reimburse for any money stolen due to the data and identity theft.
Importation of FAKE Aboriginal Arts into Australia
We as First Australian Artists are campaigning and speaking up for our Rights as legitimate Aboriginal Artists and state that ownership, responsibility and control by us as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples of our cultural heritage is paramount. It is a way of economic empowerment for us as artists who are trying to earn money from selling, reselling and reproducing of our works through sale, copyright and resale royalties and being denied a legitimate income because of this FAKE ART as has been campaigned before. We do not want any more 'Grey areas'We want the Laws changed so that: It is ILLEGAL to IMPORT printed/stamped/hand painted Aboriginal art on Aboriginal cultural artifacts (ie didgeridoos, boomerangs, music/clapping sticks, emu callers, bullroarers etc). All cultural artifacts can only be hand painted in Australia by Aboriginal Artists (certified and approved) It is ILLEGAL to IMPORT hand painted Aboriginal Artworks on canvasses or similar medium. All canvasses of Aboriginal Art can only be hand painted by Aboriginal Artists in Australia and only allowed to be reproduced (printed)) under strict License Agreements. Wholesalers/distributors of Aboriginal Art to keep certificate of Aboriginality for each Aboriginal Artist along with 1 reference from 1 acknowledged Elder to verify the Aboriginality & authenticity of this Artist and this certification must be supplied to every Retailer to be viewed by Law on request and be self-regulated. As Aboriginal Artists, we have no issue with the importation of blank timber for boomerangs, music sticks etc which cannot be sourced in Australia but they must only then be hand painted in Australia by legitimate Aboriginal Artists. Please email them through to firstname.lastname@example.org
Raise the Age Requirements for COPPA Compliance
Currently the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, also known as COPPA, protects the information of children 12 and under. Meaning that platforms only have to label themselves as 13+ to start collecting data from children. That data is then sold to 3rd parties and children are being targeted with ads. We don't believe that any child's data should be sold, whether they are 12 or 13 it makes no difference. And the truth of the matter is that children younger than 13 are gaining access to social media platforms, and their data is being sold. We propose that the age for COPPA compliance includes and protects users up to 16 years old. An estimated two thirds of all 10 year olds have some form of social media account Eighth-graders who spend 10 or more hours a week on social media are 56% more likely to say they are unhappy Teens who spend more that 3 hours a day on electronic devices are 35% more likely to have a risk factor for suicide 48% more girls say they feel left out because of what they see their friends and classmates participating in via social media A UK poll of 11-21 year olds, 36% of them said their biggest online worry was grooming 65% of 8-14 year olds have been involved in a cyberbullying incident 96% of teens use at least one social media platform 69% of teens regularly receive online communications from strangers 52% of 8-16 year olds admitted to ignoring Facebook’s age restrictions Join us by signing this petition to protect our children from big corporations buying their information and selling them back information that feeds their fears and negativity. For more information, statistic sources and to get involved in shaping social media for children, visit www.mazufamily.com/buildit