We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
The Federal Communications Commission has hit a manufacturer of
air filters, humidifiers, energy lamps, oil diffusers and similar
products with a proposed fine of almost $600,000. Pure Enrichment
is being fined for multiple violations of the FCC's labeling,
marketing and equipment authorization rules, and the order suggests
that larger fines may be coming in the future. The order highlights
any product or device that uses a microprocessor must comply with
FCC rules or face potentially heavy fines.
The FCC found that Pure Enrichment marketed 14 different
products without complying with the labeling, user manual and
equipment authorization rules. Pure Enrichment had not tested five
of the products for compliance with the rules, 12 of the products
were not properly labeled, and none of the products included
FCC-required information in their manuals. Pure Enrichment also
continued selling these products after being notified of the
violations by the FCC. Given the breadth of the violations, the
company's failure to stop selling the products after it was
aware of its violations and the economic benefit of selling the
noncompliant products, the FCC proposed a fine of $590,380. This is
more than six times the standard fine for this kind of
violation.
This decision highlights several key issues for companies that
make consumer products:
Any product that contains a
microprocessor or that produces radio waves should be evaluated for
compliance with equipment authorization and related rules in every
country where it will be sold. None of the products
involved in this case had a radio transmitter that communicated
with another device, but all of them had microprocessors or
otherwise emitted radio waves. While this case involved the FCC,
nearly every country in the world has similar rules.
The FCC may be looking beyond
computer products and products that contain transmitters in
enforcing its rules. While the rules always have covered
nearly any product that could emit radio waves, in the past the FCC
has focused mostly on products that contained transmitters or that
were computer-related. As microprocessors become ubiquitous, the
FCC likely will begin enforcing its rules more vigorously for
consumer products.
Compliance with the rules
includes proper labeling and other disclosures. The
FCC's proposed fine was not just for failure to test the
products, but also for not labeling the products and for omitting
required disclosures in the product manuals. The FCC also will fine
companies for falsely labeling products that have not been
tested.
Fines will be much greater if
a company keeps selling a product after it becomes aware of
violations. The proposed fine likely would have been
smaller if Pure Enrichment had stopped selling the products as soon
as the FCC told it about the violations.
The order also raises the possibility that the FCC may change
its rules on fines for equipment violations to increase the
standard fines substantially. FCC Commissioner Michael
O'Rielly, in a statement released with the order, indicated the
fine against Pure Enrichment should have been higher, described the
current standard fines for equipment violations as "totally
inadequate" and said that the FCC's chairman had committed
to reviewing the agency's policies for these violations in the
future. If that happens, the risks of ignoring or violating the
equipment authorization rules will become much more
significant.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act protects the rights of employment candidates and employees when the employer seeks a consumer report, commonly known as a background check, conducted by a third-party investigator.
Financial institutions and lenders must remain vigilant with compliance measures moving into 2019 to avoid violation of enhanced federal and state consumer protection laws and increased scrutiny
The California Attorney General's Office (CAGO) is conducting a series of public hearings around the state to gather input on the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA).
Almost two years ago to the day, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit became the first appellate court to rule on the lawfulness of a liability waiver in a Fair Credit Reporting Act ...
