In this episode of Regulatory Oversight, Clay Friedman, co-leader of the firm’s State Attorneys General team, welcomes Kate Donoven, consumer counsel at the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG). The conversation highlights Kate’s extensive career in consumer protection, her transition to NAAG, and the emerging trends and initiatives in consumer protection.
In this episode of Regulatory Oversight, Democratic Attorneys General Association (DAGA) President Sean Rankin joins Troutman Pepper Partners Ashley Taylor and Clayton Friedman to discuss the upcoming November 5 election and DAGA’s key focus states.
A recent conference led by Connecticut Attorney General (AG) William Tong discussed the alleged problems and potential solutions associated with plastics use and waste. Conference attendees included nearly two dozen representatives from state AG offices, medical and public health researchers, and leaders in the recycling and reclamation industry. Conversations focused on plastics’ tendency to break down in the environment and, as a result, expose people and the environment to harmful chemicals. The concerns surrounding plastics in many ways parallel the concerns surrounding PFAS, an industry targeted recently by civil and criminal enforcement actions in multiple states. Businesses up and down the plastics supply chain should take note and prepare for potential state actions that put plastics in the crosshairs.
On September 24, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 2863 into law. The bill amends California’s existing regulations on automatic renewal offers and continuous service offers made to California consumers.
Earlier this month, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a final rule to combat fake reviews and testimonials.[1]
As U.S. elections heat up, Republicans have put Democrats on the defense about the economy and the public’s perception of it. One talking point for Democrats in response, including in President Joe Biden’s last two State of the Union addresses, has been federal efforts to combat so-called junk fees.
Still, the strongest regulations are coming from states, and companies will need to keep an eye on all of these laws to comply.
“Today’s consumer protection challenges require an all-hands-on-deck response, and our report details how the FTC is working closely with state enforcers to share information, stop fraud, and ensure fairness in the marketplace[.]”[1]
On April 10, the FTC released a long-awaited report on its cooperation with state attorneys general (AGs). The theme of the report is clear: the FTC intends to continue its existing collaboration with AGs and enhance that collaboration through information-sharing and legislative changes.
On February 16, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) made a significant move to combat consumers’ receipt of unwanted communications. The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) already regulates automated calls and texts absent an exemption or the prior express consent of the called party. The FCC has now adopted new measures aimed at empowering consumers with the option to further prevent automated calls and texts.
Most products with an online marketing presence generally have “customer reviews.” However, today’s consumers cannot always trust that those reviews are from real purchasers or provide honest feedback about the quality of a product. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has sought to address these concerns, proposing a new rule aimed at stopping marketers from using illicit review and endorsement practices, including using fake reviews, suppressing honest negative reviews, and paying for positive reviews. Proponents of the rule argue these types of practices deceive consumers who are looking for honest feedback on a product or service.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently amended requirements concerning artificial or prerecorded voice calls, effective July 20.[1] See Proposed 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200. Notably, the FCC amended requirements concerning prerecorded noncommercial and nontelemarketing commercial calls by (1) placing a cap on the number of calls to up to three calls within a consecutive 30-day period, unless the caller has obtained prior express consent, and (2) requiring callers to provide specific opt-out mechanisms.