Bramson, Inc.

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IN THE MATT BRAl\JSO:' , I:'C.

CONSENT ORDER : ETC.: IX REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION" OF THE FEDERAL TRADE co::nnSSlON AXD THE Fer PROD"CCTS LARELLNG ACTS Docket C-578. Complaint, Sept. 1i163-Decision, Sept. , 1968 Consent order requiring Chicago retail furriers to cease violating the Fu.r Products Labeling Act by failng, on labels and invoices, and in advertising, to show the true animal name of furs; failng on invoices and in vcrtising to show when fur was artificially colored and the country of BRAMSON: IKC. 59i 596 Complaint origin of imparted furs; failng to use the term " Katural" an labels and invoices of furs not artificially colared: failng to show tbe Commission registered identification 'On labels; labeling and advertising furs falsely as Broadtail" ; advertising fur products as an sale at ;' savings of 1/3 to 1/2 and more, and failng to set forth the term "Dyed Broadtail-processed re(:ords as Lamb" as required in advertising: failng to maintain adequate a basis for pricing claims: substituting nonconforming labels for those originally affxed to fur products; and failng in ot.her respects to comply with requirements 'Of the Act.

COMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federa.l Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Tmde Commission having reason to believe that Bramson, Inc., a corporate.ion, hereinafter referred t.o as respondent, Ims violated t.he provisions of said Acts and the Rule.s and Regulat.ions promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it respect thereof would be in the public interest hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that. respect fls follows: PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Bramson Inc. , is a corporation organizrcl, exi ting n.nd dning lnl3il1lS: llDllel' and by ,-virtue of the laws of the State of Illinois.

Respondent is it retailer of fur products with its offce and principal place of business located at 1 GO X art h l\Iichigan A venue, Chicago ilinois.

PAR. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Fur Product.s Labeling Act on August 9, 1952 respondent. has been and is now engaged in the introduction int.o commerce, and in the sale, advertising, and offering for sale in commerce and in the transportation and distribution in commerce, of fur products; and has sold, advertised, offered for sale, transported and distributed fur products which have been made in whole or in part of furs which have been shipped and refur prod-ceived in commerce, as the terms ': commerce fur\\ and " uct ' are, defined in the Fur Produds Lnbl'lil1g )..l'. PAR. 3. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that they were not label cd as required under the provisions of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Hegulations promulgated thereunder. Among such misbranded fur products, but not limited thereto ",ere fur products with labels which failed: 1. To show t.he true animal name of the fur used in the fur product. . To show the name or other identificat.ion issued and registered by the Commission, of one or more of the persons who manufactured such fur product for introduction into commerce, introduced it into 7S0-01S-68- ;J!J 598 FEDERAL 'frade CO:MHSSION DECISIOXS Complaint 63 F.

commerce, sold it in commerce, advertised or offered it for sale commerce, or transport.ed or distributed it in commerce. PAR. 4. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in violation of the Fur Products Labe.ling Act in that they were not labeled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgat.ed t.hereunder in t.he following respect.s:

(a) Information required under Scct.ion 4(2) of the Fur Product.s Labeling Act. and t.he Hules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth on labels in abbreviated form, in violation of Hule 4 of said Rules and Regnlat.ions.

(b) The term "natural" was not. used on labels t.o describe fur product.s which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Rule 19 (g) of said Rules and Regulations.

(c) Labels affxed to fl1 products did not comply with the mini. mum size requirements of one and t.three-quarter inches by two and three quarter inches, in violation of Rule 27 of said Hules and Regulations.

(d) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Hules and Hegulations promulgated thereunder was mingled with nonrequired information, in violation of Rule 29 (a) of said Rules and Eegulat.ions. (e) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and R.egulations promulgated thereunder was not completely set out on one side of liLbels, in violation of Rule 29 (a) of said Hules and Hegulations. (f) InfonmltioJl required under SectioJl 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the HnJes and Hegulations promulgated thereunder was set forth in hand\writing on la,Gels, in violation of Rule 29 (b) of sa.id Hules and Regnlatlons.

(g') Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder ,vas not set forth in the required seqncnce, in violation of Rule 30 of said Rules and Regulations.

(h) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder-r ,vas not. set forth separately on labels with respect to each section of fur products composed of hvo or more sections containing dHTerent. animal furs, in violation of Rule 36 of said Rules and Regulat.ions.

(1) Hequirecl item numbers were not set forth on labels, in violation of Hule 40 of said l,ules and Regulations. PAR. 5. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced by the respondent in that they were not jnvoiced as required BRA:\S0N IKC. 599 596 Complaint by Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and R.egulations prOlnlllgatecl under such Act. Among such falsely and deceptively invoiced fur products, but not limited thereto, were fur products cove.red by invoices which failed: 1. To show the true animal name or the fur used in the fur product. 2. To disclose that the fur contained in the fur product was bleached, dyed or otherwise artificially colored, when such was the fact.

3. To show the country of origin of imported furs used in fur products.

PAll. 6. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced with respect to the name or designation of the animal or animals that. produced the fur from which the said fur products had been manufact.ured, in violation of Section 5(b) (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

Among sllch falsely rmcl deceptively invoiced fur products, but not limited thereto, were fur products which were invoiced as "Broadtail" the,reby implying that the furs contained therein were entitled to the designation "Broadtail Lamb" when in truth and in fact they were not entitled to such designation.

PAll. 7. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in violation of the Fur Product.s Labeling Act in that they were not invoiced in accordance with the Rules and Regulations pro. mulgated thereunder in the following respects: (a) Informp"tion required under Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth on invoices in abbreviated form, in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Regulations.

(b) The term "Dyed Broadtail-processed Lamb" was not set forth on invoices in the marnler required by law, in violation of Rule 10 of said Rules and Regulations.

(c) The term "natural" was not used on invoices to describe furs \which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, t.ip-dyed or otherwise aii, ficially colored, in violation of Rule 19 (g) of said Rules and Regulations.

(d) Required iteln numbers \Verenot set forth on invoices, in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and R.egulations. P,IR. 8. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively advertised in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that cert.ain a,dvel'tisel1ents intended to aid, promote and assist, directly or indirectly, in t.he sale and oflering for sale of suc.h fur products were not. in accordance with the provisions of Section 5 (a) of the said Act.

, 600 FEDERAL TRADE COl\L\USS10X DECISIOKS Complaint If. Among and included in the aforesaid advertisements, but not limited thereto ere advertisements of respoJlcle,nt which appeared in issues of the Chicago Tribune, a. newspaper published in the city of Chicago, State of Illinois.

Among such false and (tecepthTe ad \'ertisements, but not limited thereto, were advertisements which failed:

1. To 8hmy the true animal name. of the. fnl' used in the fur product. 2. To show that t.he fur contained in the fur product was bleached dyed or ot.henyise artificially colored, when such was the fact. 3. To 5ho\\- t,he country of origin of imported JUl'S contained in fur products.

PAR. 9. By means of the aforesaid advertisements a,nc1 ot.hers of similar import and meaning not specificially referred to 11e1'ein, respondent falsely and deceptively advertised fur products in t.hat. certain of said fur products were falsely or deceptively identified with respect to the name or designation of t.he animal or animals that produeed the fur from which the said fur products had been manufactured in violation of Section 5 (a) (5) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

Among such falsely and deceptively advertiserl fur products, but not limited thereto, "ere fur products advertised as "Broadtail thereby, implying that the furs contained therein were entitled to the designation "Broadtail Lamb" rrhen in t.ruth ancl in fact they e1'e not entitled to snc.h designation.

PAR. 10. In advertising fur proclncts for sale as aforesaid respondent represented through such statements as ""\Vonc1erful, '\Vonc1erful January Buys At Jubilant. Savings of 1/:1 to 1/2 and 1\ore" that prices of fur products were reduced in direct proportion to the per. centages stated and that the amount of saidrecluction afforded savings to the purchasel's of respondent's products ,,,hen in fact such prices were not reduced in direct proport,ion to the percentage stated and the represented savings were not therf'b r afforded t,o the said pur. chasers, in violation of Section 5(a) (5) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

PAR. 11. By means of the aforesaid ad vcrtiscmcnts ana others of similar import and meaning not specifically re.ferred to herein, respondent falsely a.nd deceptively advertised fur products in viola.tion of 1he Fur Products Labeling Act in that the said fur products were not fl,dyel'tlsed in accordance with the H'llIes and Hegnlations promul. gated t,hereunder in the following respects: 1. The wrm "Dyed Broadt.ail-processed Lamb" was not set forth iu the manner required, in violation of Rule 10 of the said Rules and Regulations.

BRA1\ISO?\ ) INC. 601 596 Decbiol1 and Order 2. The term "KflturnF \\"as not used to describe fur products which we,re not pointed, blefLChed, c1yec1 , t.ip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of RuJc lD(g) of the saitl Rules and Regulations. \H, 12. In advertising fur products for sale, a.s aforesaid, respondent made pric.ing claim:) and representations of the types oven'cI by 8ub,00tion8 (a), (b), (0) and (d) of Rule 44 of the Regulat-ious l!udcr the -Fur Products Labeling Act, Respondent in making such claims and represent.ations illiled t.o maintain full and adequate rp,corcls disclosing the facts upon l\"which such pricing cla,ims and representat.ions were based, in violation of Rule 44(e) of the sajd Rules and Regulations.

PAn. 13. Hesponcle,nt in illtTollucing, selling, advertising, and offering for sale, in commerce, and in processing for commerce, fur products; and in selhng, advertising, oflering for sale and processing fur produds 'which IU1Ve been shipped and received in commerce, has misbranded such fur products by subst.tuting thereon, labels which did not. conform to the requirement,s of Section 4 of the Fur Products Lnbe.ing "cct, for the l"beJs "fixed to said fur products by the manufacturer' 01' distributor pursuant to Section 4 of said Act. in viol"tion of Section 3(e) of s"id Act.

PAH. J4. TIH: afol'csalcI acts and practices of respondent, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labe1incr Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder and constitute un fall' and deceptive acts and practices and unfair methods of competition in commerce 111(le1' ihe Fellel',ll Trade Commission Act. DECISION A D ORDER The Commission having heretofore determined to issue its complaint charging the respondent named in t,he caption here-of with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and the I' ul' Products Labeling Act., and the respondent having been served with not.ice of said determination and 'With a copy of the complaint the Conm1ission intended to issu2, together with a proposed form of order j and The respondent add counse. for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement c.containing a consent order, a,n admission by pondent of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the complaint to issue J1(rein, a statemcn t. that. the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondent that the Jaw has been violated as set. forth in such complaint., and 'Waivers a,nd provisions as required by the Commission rules; and The Commission, having considered the agreement, hereby accepts sa, , issues its complaint in t.he form contemplated by said agreement 602 FEDERAL TR!J\DE COM:\HSSION DECISIO Decision and Ol'd€l' 53 F.

makes t.he following jurisdictional findings and ent.ers the following order:

1. Respondent Bramson, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Illinois, wit.h it.s offce and principal place of business located at 160 N ort.h Michigan A venue, Chicago, Ilinois. 2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondent, and t..he proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER It is ordered That respondent Bla111S0n, Inc., a corporation, and its offcers and respondent' s representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in c01mection with the introduction, into commerce, or the sale, advertising or offering ior sale in commerce" or the transportat.ion or distribution, in commerce6 of any fur product; or in cormection with the sale, advertising, offering for sale, t.transportation or distribution, of any fur product which is made in whole or in part. of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce, as "commerce, "fur" and " fut product" arc defined in t.he Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith.h cease and desist from: A. Misbranding fur products by:

1. Failing to affx labels to fur products showing in words and in figures pla.inly legible a.D of the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

2. Setting fort.h information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulat.ions promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form on labels affxed to fur products.

3. Failing to set forth the term "1' natural" as part of the informa.tion required to be disclosed on labels under t.he Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe fllr products which are not point.ed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored.

4. Affxing to fur products labels that do not comply with the minimum size requirements of one and three-quarter inches by two and three-quarter inches.

5. Sett.ing forth information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder mingled with non-required information on labels affxed to fur products. BRAMS02\ INC. 603 596 Dcc:sion and Order 6. Failing to completely set out informa,tion required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act a,nd the Rules and Regula,tions thereunder on one side of the labels a,ffxed to fur products.

'7. Setting forth information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in ha,ndwriting on labels affxed to fur products.

8. Failing to set forth information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules a,nd Regulations promulgated thereunder on labels in the sequence required by Rule 30 of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations. 9. Failng to set forth separately on labels attached to fur products composed of two or more sections containing different animal fur the information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Pro(lucts Labeling Act and the Rules and R.egulations promnJgat.ed t.hereunder \,ith respect to the fur comprising Bach section.

10. Failing t.o set forth on labels the item number or mark assigned to a fur product.

B. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: 1. Failing to furnish invoices to purchasers of fur prod. ucts showing in words and figures plainly Jegible aU the information required to be disclosed in each of the subsections of Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. 2. Setting forth on invoices pertaining to fur products any false or deceptive information with respect to the name or designation of the animal or animals that produced the fur contained in such fur product.

3. Setting forth information required under Section 5 (b) (1) ofthe Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in a,bbreviated form. 4. Failing to set forth the term "Dyed Broadtail-processed Lamb" in the manner required where an election is made to use that term instead of t.he words "Dyed Lamb" 5. Failing to set forth the term "Natural" as part of the information required to be disclosed on invoices under the Fur Products Labeling Act. and Rules and Regulat.ions promulgated t.hereunder to describe fur product.s which are ndt point.ed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise a,artificially colored.

6. Failing to set forth on invoices the item number or mark assigned to fur products.

604 FEDERAL 'Ik.\.DE CO BlISS'IOK DECISlOKS Decision and Order 63 F.

C. Falsely or deceptively advertising fur products through the use of any advertisement, representation, public announcement or notice which is intended to aid, promote or assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale, or offering for sale of any fur product, and which:

figures plainly legible 1. Fails to set forth in words and all t.he informat.ion required t.o be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5(a) of t.he Fur Products Labeling Act.

2. Falsely or deceptively identifies any such fur product as to the name or designation of t.he animal or animals t.hat produced the fur contained in the fur product. 3. Fails to set. forth t.he term "Dyed Broadtail-procesd Lamb" in the manner required where an election is made to use that. term inst.ead of the words "Dyed Lamb" 4. Fails to set forth the term "Natural" as part of the inforInation required to be disclosed in advertisements under the Fur Products Labeling Act and t.he Rules and Regulalations promulgated thereunder to describe fur products "which are not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or ot.herwise artificially colored.

5. Hcpresents directly or by implication through percentage sa,vings claims that prices of fur products are rednc.ed t.o afford purchasers of respondent.' s fur products t.he percentage of savings stated whe,n the prices of such fur products atc not reduced to afford to purchasers the percentage sa.yings stated.

6. :\fisrepresent.s in any manner the savings available purchasers ?f respondents fur products.

7. Falsely or deceptively represent.s in any manner that. prices of respondents fur products are reduced. D. Making claims and representations of the types covered by subsections (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Rule 44 of the Rules and Heg1l1at.ions promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act unless there are maintained by respondent. full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims and represent.ations are based.

It is further ordered That respondent Bramson, Inc., a corporation and its offc( rs and respondent's representatives, agents and employee, direct 1y or through any corporate or ot.her device, in connection with the introduction, sale advertising or offering for sale, in commerce or the processing for commerce, of fur products; or in con- KRESEL & '''OLF ET AL. G05 596 Complaint nection with the selling, advertising, offering for sale, or processing of fur products which have been shipped and received in commerce do forthwith cease and desist. from misbranding fur products by substituting for the labels affxed to such fur products pursuant to Section 4 of the Fur Products Labeling Act labels which do not conform to the requirements of the aforesaid Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated t.hereunder.

It is further ordered That. the respondent. herein shall, within sixty.y (60) days aft.er service upon it. of t.his order, me with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which it has complied with this order.