The FTC recently announced that glue maker, Chemence, paid a landmark $1.2 million settlement to resolve allegations that the company failed to comply with a 2016 Order regarding “Made in USA” claims. The 2016 Order required Chemence to pay $220,000 and to stop making misleading claims that its products were made in the United States.
FTC’s Mail Order Rule Crackdown Continues
Last week the FTC filed suits against a few online merchandisers regarding their alleged failures to promptly deliver personal protective equipment (PPE) to consumers. The lawsuits allege that three online sellers violated the FTC’s Mail Order Rule, which mandates that companies notify consumers of shipping delays in a timely manner and give them the
Data Protection and National Security Concerns Meet in TikTok, WeChat Executive Orders
This summer continues to be a busy season at the intersection of data protection and national security. As we reported in July, the Schrems II decision invalidated Privacy Shield on the ground that its national security derogations were too expansive.
Last week, the President seized on concerns about surveillance by the Chinese government as a core rationale for Executive Orders directing the Department of Commerce to prohibit transactions involving TikTok (and its parent company, ByteDance) and WeChat (and its parent company, Tencent Holdings). For instance, the TikTok Order asserts that the company’s data practices “potentially allow[] China to track the locations of Federal employees and contractors, build dossiers of personal information for blackmail, and conduct corporate espionage;” and the WeChat Order states that WeChat’s data collection “threatens to allow the Chinese Communist Party access to Americans’ personal and proprietary information.”
The scope of these Orders remains unclear. Members of Kelley Drye’s Export Control and Sanctions team provide further analysis on Kelley Drye’s Trade and Manufacturing Monitor (see below), and we will continue to monitor how implementation of the Orders could affect companies’ communications and transactions on these popular platforms.
President Issues Executive Orders Targeting TikTok and WeChat
Last Thursday, the President issued two executive orders (“E.O.s”) targeting social media applications TikTok (and its parent company, ByteDance) and WeChat (and its parent company, Tencent Holdings). The E.O.s direct the Department of Commerce (“DOC”) to prohibit transactions involving the applications. Companies that deal directly with TikTok or WeChat in the United States and abroad or use their services need to evaluate the scope of those activities and determine if they will be affected by the E.O.s.
The E.O.s were issued pursuant to the national emergency declared in E.O. 13873 regarding information and communication services in the United States that are controlled by persons within the jurisdiction of a “foreign adversary.” In issuing the E.O.s, the President cited concerns that the Chinese government could gain access to Americans’ personal information collected by the applications, among other policy considerations. The President has the power to issue the directives under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (“IEEPA,” 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), which provides the President with the authority to declare national emergencies and implement sweeping trade controls based on national security concerns.
The intended scope of the E.O.s is not clear due to ambiguous language used in Section 1, which contain the E.O.s’ primary prohibitions. Here is an excerpt of that section from the TikTok order:
Section 1. (a) The following actions shall be prohibited beginning 45 days after the date of this order, to the extent permitted under applicable law: any transaction by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, with ByteDance Ltd. (a.k.a. Zìjié Tiàodòng), Beijing, China, or its subsidiaries, in which any such company has any interest, as identified by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) under section 1(c) of this order.
[…]
(c) 45 days after the date of this order, the Secretary shall identify the transactions subject to subsection (a) of this section.
There are two plausible readings of that section. The first is that all transactions involving ByteDance and its subsidiaries will be prohibited within 45 days. The second, and we believe more appropriate reading, is that all types of transactions specified by DOC will be prohibited. The inclusion of the last sentence of Section 1(a) and of Section 1(c) suggests that DOC has discretion to impose targeted prohibitions that only apply to certain types of transactions involving the subject companies, rather than all transactions involving ByteDance. While the ultimate scope of the prohibitions may not be clear until DOC takes action, the term “transactions” is often interpreted broadly, and could include many types of business dealings, not just financial transactions involving the companies. The White House is reportedly pushing for a broad interpretation of both E.O.s, noting that prohibited transactions could include making the apps available on app stores, purchasing advertising on TikTok, or accepting terms of service to download the applications.
It is also important to note that the TikTok and WeChat E.O.s differ in scope. The TikTok E.O. authorizes prohibitions on any transaction involving ByteDance and its subsidiaries. In contrast, the WeChat E.O. is more narrowly constructed to authorize prohibitions on transactions with Tencent Holdings or its subsidiaries that are “related to WeChat.” The more narrow construction with respect to Tencent may be intended to exclude Tencent’s many U.S. investments unrelated to WeChat from coverage under the E.O.
Much remains unclear about the intended scope and ultimate application of the E.O.s. Given this regulatory uncertainty, companies with business dealings directly or indirectly involving ByteDance or Tencent should review their engagements closely for potential exposure under the new rules. In particular, companies that use WeChat services for commercial purposes, including its IT and payment services, will need to evaluate whether they can continue that activity in the United States and abroad.
Please contact our Export Control and Sanctions team with any questions related to these developments.
Webinar Replay: Selling Online: How to Avoid Flattening the Curve of an Uptick in Website Traffic
The replay of our recent webinar Selling Online: How to Avoid Flattening the Curve of an Uptick in Website Traffic is available here.
COVID-19 has increased the already dizzying amount of online sales, making the applicable marketing requirements increasingly important. These rules affect not just how companies advertise and promote products and services online,
Tea Drinkers Bag Bigelow Tea for “Made in USA” Claims
On July 13, consumers filed a class action complaint in California federal court against Bigelow Tea, alleging the company falsely and deceptively represented that its tea products were made in the United States. Plaintiffs claim that the tea manufacturer advertised that its tea products were “Manufactured in the USA 100% American Family Owned” and “America’s
FTC Files Complaint Alleging Mail Order Rule Violations
As the pandemic continues to turn consumers to online shopping, shoppers report increasing dissatisfaction with websites that advertise “Fast Shipping,” “2-Day Shipping,” or make similar representations about speedy shipping and then fail to deliver. In the last few months the FTC has received record numbers of complaints related to online shopping, and most of them
FTC Seeks Rule to Collect Civil Penalties for Made in USA Labeling Violations
Further to ongoing efforts to evaluate and regulate how companies advertise and label that their products are “Made in the USA,” last week the FTC issued a staff report and a proposed rule that would include the possibility of civil penalties up to $43,280 per violation.
FTC Chairman Joseph Simons joined Commissioners Rohit
Ad Law Access Podcast: Green Marketing
As we have written about extensively on this blog, consumers continue to grow more environmentally conscious and demand products that reflect this concern. To meet consumer demands and as part of social responsibility initiatives, companies are increasing their “sustainable” practices, recycling materials, upcycling other products, and working to reduce waste and environmental harms. As
Earth Day 2020: Fashion Brands Continue Focus on Green Marketing
To celebrate the 50th Anniversary of Earth Day this week, we look at the increasingly pressing topic of green marketing in the fashion industry. Recent studies have shown that environmentally conscious consumers continue to grow in number and demand products that have a reduced effect on the environment. To meet this demand and as
FTC Delivers $9.3 M Reminder About Mail Order Rule
Yesterday, the FTC announced that online retailer Fashion Nova had agreed to pay a record $9.3 million to settle charges that it violated the Mail Order Rule by failing to properly notify customers and give them the chance to cancel their orders when the company couldn’t ship items on time, and that it unlawfully used