Mace Security International, Inc., et al.; Proposed Consent Agreement With Analysis To Aid Public Comment
Federal RegisterJan 20, 1994
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
[File No. 912 3374]
Mace Security International, Inc., et al.; Proposed Consent
Agreement With Analysis To Aid Public Comment
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.
ACTION: Proposed consent agreement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In settlement of alleged violations of federal law prohibiting
unfair acts and practices and unfair methods of competition, this
consent agreement, accepted subject to final Commission approval, would
require, among other things, the marketers of self-defense products to
disclose that their MACE product may not be effective against armed
assailants or against enraged, drugged, or intoxicated people. The
order also would require the company to substantiate any future claims
it makes about any attribute of any self-protection product, and to
send a notice of the settlement to distributors and consumers.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 21, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary,
room 159, 6th St. and Pa. Ave., NW, Washington, DC. 20580.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Bloom or Alice Au, FTC/New
York Regional Office, 150 William St., 13th Floor, New York, N.Y.
10038. (212) 264-8290.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 6(f) of the Federal
Trade Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C. 46 and Section 2.34 of
the Commission's Rules of Practice (16 CFR 2.34), notice is hereby
given that the following consent agreement containing a consent order
to cease and desist, having been filed with and accepted, subject to
final approval, by the Commission, has been placed on the public record
for a period of sixty (60) days. Public comment is invited. Such
comments or views will be considered by the Commission and will be
available for inspection and copying at its principal office in
accordance with Sec. 4.9(b)(6)(ii) of the Commission's Rules of
Practice (16 CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii)).
[File No. 9123374]
Agreement Containing Consent Order To Cease and Desist
In the Matter of MACE Security International, Inc., a
corporation, Personal Security, Inc., a corporation, Jon E.
Goodrich, individually and as an officer and director of MACE
Security International, Inc., and Personal Security, Inc., Robert P.
Gould, individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc., and Personal Security, Inc., and James Kardas,
individually and as an officer and director of Personal Security,
Inc.
The Federal Trade Commission having initiated an investigation of
certain acts and practices of MACE Security International, Inc., a
corporation; Personal Security, Inc., a corporation; Jon E. Goodrich,
individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc.; Robert P. Gould,
individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc.; and James Kardas,
individually and as an officer and director of Personal Security, Inc.;
and it now appearing that MACE Security International, Inc., a
corporation; Personal Security, Inc., a corporation; Jon E. Goodrich,
individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc.; Robert P. Gould,
individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc.; and James Kardas,
individually and as an officer and director of Personal Security, Inc.;
hereinafter sometimes referred to as proposed respondents or
respondents, are willing to enter into an agreement containing an Order
to cease and desist from the use of the acts and practices being
investigated.
It is hereby agreed by and between MACE Security International,
Inc., by its duly authorized officer; Personal Security, Inc., by its
duly authorized officer; Jon E. Goodrich, individually and as an
officer and director of MACE Security International Inc. and Personal
Security, Inc.; Robert P. Gould, individually and as an officer and
director of MACE Security International, Inc. and Personal Security,
Inc.; and James Kardas, individually and as an officer and director of
Personal Security, Inc.; and their attorney, and counsel for the
Federal Trade Commission that:
1. Respondent MACE Security International, Inc. is a corporation
organized, existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws
of the State of Delaware, with its corporate office located at 160
Benmont Avenue, Bennington, Vermont 05201. Respondent was formerly
doing business as Mark Sport, Inc.
Respondent Personal Security, Inc. is a corporation organized,
existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the
State of Vermont, with its corporate office located at 160 Benmont
Avenue, Bennington, Vermont 05201.
Proposed respondents Jon E. Goodrich and Robert P. Gould are
officers and directors of MACE Security International, Inc. and
Personal Security, Inc. Mr. Goodrich and Mr. Gould formulate, direct,
and control the policies, acts, and practices of said corporations and
their addresses are the same as that of said corporations. Proposed
respondent James Kardas is an officer and director of Personal
Security, Inc. Mr. Kardas formulates, directs, and controls the
policies, acts, and practices of said corporation, and his address is
the same as that of said corporation.
2. Proposed respondents admit all the jurisdictional facts set
forth in the attached draft complaint.
3. Proposed respondents waive:
(a) Any further procedural steps;
(b) The requirement that the Commission's decision contain a
statement of findings of fact and conclusions of law;
(c) All rights to seek judicial review or otherwise to challenge or
contest the validity of the Order entered pursuant to this agreement;
and
(d) Any claim under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 5 U.S.C. 504.
4. This agreement shall not become part of the public reccord of
the proceeding unless and until it is accepted by the Commission. If
this agreement is accepted by the Commission, it, together with the
attached draft complaint, will be placed on the public record for a
period of sixty (60) days and information in respect thereto publicly
released. The Commission thereafter may either withdraw its acceptance
of this agreement and so notify the proposed respondents, in which
event it will take such action as it may consider appropriate, or issue
and serve its complaint (in such form as the circumstances may require)
and decision, in disposition of the proceeding.
5. This agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not
constitute an admission by proposed respondents of facts, other than
jurisdictional facts, or of violations of law as alleged in the draft
of complaint here attached.
6. This agreement contemplates that, if it is accepted by the
Commission, and if such acceptance is not subsequently withdraw by the
Commission pursuant to the provisions of Sec. 2.34 of the Commission's
Rules, the Commission may, without further notice to proposed
respondents: (1) Issue its complaint corresponding in form and
substance with the attached draft complaint and its decision containing
the following Order to cease and desist in disposition of the
proceeding; and (2) make information public in respect thereto. When so
entered, the Order to cease and shall have the same force and effect
and may be altered, modified or set aside in the same manner and within
the same time provided by statute for other orders. The Order shall
become final upon service. Delivery by the U.S. Postal Service of the
complaint and decision containing the agreed-to Order to proposed
respondents' address as stated in this agreement shall constitute
service. Proposed respondents waive any right they may have to any
other manner of service. The complaint may be used in construing the
terms of the Order, and no agreement, understanding, representation, or
interpretation not contained in the Order or the agreement may be used
to vary or contradict the terms of the Order.
7. Proposed respondents have read the attached draft complaint and
the following Order. Proposed respondents understand that once the
Order has been issued, they will be required to file one or more
compliance reports showing that they have fully complied with the
Order. Proposed respondents further understand that they may be liable
for civil penalties in the amount provided by law for each violation of
the Order after it becomes final.
Order
Definitions
A. For purposes of this Order, ``competent and reliable scientific
evidence'' shall mean tests, analyses, research, studies, or other
evidence based on the expertise of professionals in the relevant area,
that has been conducted and evaluated in an objective manner by persons
qualified to do so, using procedures generally accepted in the
profession to yield accurate and reliable results.
B. For purposes of this Order, ``MACE'' shall mean any chemical
self-protection product marketed for civilian use that contains as its
active ingredient approximately 1% phenylchloromethyl-ketone (a.k.a.
chloroacetophenone or CN).
C. For purposes of this Order, ``chemical self-protection product''
shall mean any chemical self-protection product marketed for civilian
use, including but not necessarily limited to products containing
phenylchloromethylketone (a.k.a. chloroacetophenone or CN),
orthochlorobenzalnalononitrile (CS) or oleoresin capsicum (OC).
D. For purposes of this Order, ``distributor'' shall mean any
person or entity that, since January 1, 1991, has made at least one
purchase from respondents of 12 or more units of MACE or of fewer units
of MACE for which total purchase price exceeded $100.00.
I
It is ordered That respondents MACE Security International, Inc., a
corporation, its successors and assigns, and its officers and
directors; Personal Security, Inc., a corporation, its successors and
assigns, and its officers and directors; Jon E. Goodrich, individually
and as an officer and director of MACE Security International, Inc. and
Personal Security, Inc.; Robert P. Gould, individually and as an
officer and director of MACE Security International, Inc. and Personal
Security, Inc.; and James Kardas, individually and as an officer and
director of Personal Security, Inc.; and respondents' agents,
representatives and employees, directly or through any corporation,
subsidiary, division or other device, in connection with the
manufacturing, labeling, advertising, promotion, offering for sale,
sale, or distribution of MACE or any chemical self-protection product,
in or affecting commerce, as ``commerce'' is defined in the Federal
Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from representing,
in any manner, directly or by implication, that:
A. One or more sprays of such product will stop an assailant;
B. Any contact with the upper torso by a spray of such product will
stop an assailant; or
C. Use of such product will instantly stop an assailant;
unless such representation is true and, at the time of making such
representation, respondents possess and rely upon competent and
reliable evidence, which when appropriate must be competent and
reliable scientific evidence, that substantiates such representation.
II
It is further ordered, That respondents MACE Security
International, Inc., a corporation, its successors and assigns, and its
officers and directors; Personal Security, Inc., a corporation, its
successors and assigns, and its officers and directors; Jon E.
Goodrich, individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc.; Robert P. Gould,
individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc.; and James Kardas,
individually and as an officer and director of Personal Security, Inc.;
and respondents' agents, representatives and employees, directly or
through any corporation, subsidiary, division or other device, in
connection with the manufacturing, labeling, advertising, promotion,
offering for sale, sale, or distribution of MACE or any chemical self-
protection product, in or affecting commerce, as ``commerce'' is
defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and
desist from representing, in any manner, directly or by implication,
that:
A. One or more sprays of such product will keep an assailant
incapacitated for up to or about 20 minutes or any other period of
time;
B. The effectiveness of such product for civilian self-protection
has been proven in use by police forces;
C. Four out of five or any other number of police officers in the
United States carry such product; or
D. Over 4000 police departments or any other number of police
departments in the United States use such product for protection
against assault;
unless at the time of making such representation, respondents possess
and rely upon competent and reliable evidence, which when appropriate
must be competent and reliable scientific evidence, that substantiates
such representation.
III
It is further ordered, That respondents MACE Security
International, Inc., a corporation, its successors and assigns, and its
officers and directors; Personal Security, Inc., a corporation, its
successors and assigns, and its officers and directors; Jon E.
Goodrich, individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc.; Robert P. Gould,
individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc.; and James Kardas,
individually and as an officer and director of Personal Security, Inc.;
and respondents' agents, representatives and employees, directly or
through any corporation, subsidiary, division or other device, in
connection with the manufacturing, labeling, advertising, promotion,
offering for sale, sale, or distribution of MACE or any chemical self-
protection product, in or affecting commerce, as ``commerce'' is
defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and
desist from representing, in any manner, directly or by implication,
the relative or absolute efficacy, benefits, usage, performance, or
attributes of MACE or any chemical self-protection product, unless at
the time of making such representation, respondents possess and rely
upon competent and reliable evidence, which when appropriate must be
competent and reliable scientific evidence, that substantiates such
representation.
IV
It is further ordered, That respondents MACE Security
International, Inc., a corporation, its successors and assigns, and its
officers and directors; Personal Security, Inc., a corporation, its
successors and assigns, and its officers and directors; Jon E.
Goodrich, individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc.; Robert P. Gould,
individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc.; and James Kardas,
individually and as an officer and director of Personal Security, Inc.;
and respondents' agents, representatives and employees, directly or
through any corporation, subsidiary, division or other device, in
connection with the manufacturing, labeling, advertising, promotion,
offering for sale, sale, or distribution of MACE or any substantially
similar product, in or affecting commerce, as ``commerce'' is defined
in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from
representing, in any manner, directly or by implication, the
effectiveness of MACE or any substantially similar product unless
respondents disclose in each advertisement in which the representation
is made, clearly and prominently, the following statement:
A. In a print advertisement:
CAUTION: MACE MAY NOT BE EFFECTIVE AGAINST ARMED ASSAILANTS.
MACE may take several seconds to work and may not work on enraged,
drugged, or intoxicated people.
B. In a television, cablecast, videotape, or radio advertisement:
CAUTION: MACE MAY NOT BE EFFECTIVE AGAINST ARMED ASSAILANTS AND
ENRAGED, DRUGGED, OR INTOXICATED PEOPLE.
Nothing contrary to, inconsistent with, or in mitigation of the
above disclosures shall be used in any advertisement in any medium.
For purposes of this Order, ``clearly and prominently'' as used
herein shall mean as follows:
(a) In a television, cablecast, and videotape release, the
disclosure shall be presented simultaneously in both the audio and
video portions of the advertisement. The audio disclosure shall be
delivered in a volume and cadence and for a duration sufficient for an
ordinary consumer to hear and comprehend it. The video disclosure shall
be of a size and shade, and shall appear on the screen for a duration
sufficient for an ordinary consumer to read and comprehend it.
(b) In a print advertisement, the above disclosure shall be printed
in a typeface and color that are clear and prominent and in close
proximity to the representation that triggers the disclosure.
(c) In a radio advertisement, the disclosure shall be delivered in
a volume and cadence and for a duration sufficient for an ordinary
consumer to hear and comprehend it.
V
It is further ordered, That respondents MACE Security
International, Inc., a corporation, its successors and assigns, and its
officers and directors; Personal Security, Inc., a corporation its
successors and assigns, and its officers and directors; Jon E.
Goodrich, individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc.; Robert P. Gould,
individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc.; and James Kardas,
individually and as an officer and director of Personal Security, Inc.;
and respondents' agents, representatives and employees, directly or
through any corporation, subsidiary, division or other device, in
connection with the manufacturing, labeling, advertising, promotion,
offering for sale, sale, or distribution of MACE or any substantially
similar product, in or affecting commerce, as ``commerce'' is defined
in the Federal Trade Commission Act, shall disclose the following
statement on a product insert enclosed in each product package:
Caution: MACE MAY NOT BE EFFECTIVE AGAINST ARMED ASSAILANTS.
MACE may take several seconds to work and may not work on enraged,
drugged, or intoxicated people.
On the product insert, the disclosure shall be printed in a
typeface and color that are clear and prominent and shall appear before
all written text, other than the name of the product or product
slogans.
It is provided, however, It will not be considered a violation of
this Order Provision V for respondents to use, until May 8, 1994, the
product insert identified as Exhibit 1 of this Order (the ``in-print
inset'') in satisfaction of the product insert disclosure obligation
specified in this Order Provision V, provided that:
(1) The in-print inserts were printed prior to November 8, 1993;
(2) The text, ``You have purchased a MACE unit which contains the
same formulation that has been proven in over twenty years of use by
police departments. In fact, it has been chosen by more police
departments than all other tear gas aerosols combined,'' shall be
blacked out or otherwise rendered completely illegible; and
(3) The text, ``Do not use your MACE unit on an assailant who
appears to be armed. Even though it may take only a few seconds for the
MACE formulation to take effect, an armed assailant might use his
weapon during those few seconds,'' shall be highlighted in yellow to
increase its prominence.
VI
It is further ordered, That respondents MACE Security
International, Inc., a corporation, its successors and assigns, and its
officers and directors; Personal Security, Inc., a corporation, its
successors and assigns, and its officers and directors; Jon E.
Goodrich, individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security Inc.; Robert P. Gould,
individually and as an officer and director of MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc.; and James Kardas,
individually and as an officer and director of Personal Security, Inc.,
shall, within thirty (30) days after the date of service of this Order:
(1) Send, by first class certified mail, return receipt requested,
to each distributor of MACE with which they have done business since
January 1, 1991, a copy of appendix A of this Order; and
(2) Send, by first class mail, to each non-distributor who
purchased MACE from respondents since January 1, 1991, a copy of
Appendix B of this Order.
VII
It is further ordered, That for five (5) years after the last date
of dissemination of any representation covered by this Order,
respondents MACE Security International, Inc. and Personal Security,
Inc., or their successors and assigns, shall maintain and upon request
make available to the Federal Trade Commission for inspection and
copying:
A. All materials that were relied upon in disseminating such
representation;
B. All tests, reports, studies, surveys, demonstrations or other
evidence in their possession or control that contradict, qualify, or
call into question such representation, or the basis relied upon for
such representation, including complaints from consumers; and
C. All return receipts required by Order Provision VI.
VIII
It is further ordered, That respondents MACE Security
International, Inc. and Personal Security, Inc. shall notify the
Commission at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of any
proposed change in the corporate respondent such as dissolution,
assignment, or sale resulting in the emergence of a successor
corporation, the creation or dissolution of subsidiaries, the filing of
a bankruptcy petition, or any other change in the corporation(s) that
may affect compliance obligations arising out of this Order.
IX
It is further ordered, That respondents Jon E. Goodrich, Robert P.
Gould, and James Kardas shall, for a period of ten (10) years from the
date of issuance of this Order, notify the Commission within thirty
(30) days of the discontinuance of his present business or employment
and of his affiliation with any new business or employment in the self-
protection industry. Each notice of affiliation with any new business
or employment shall include respondent's new business address and
telephone number, current home address, and a statement describing the
nature of the business or employment and his duties and
responsibilities.
X
It is further ordered, That respondents MACE Security
International, Inc., Personal Security, Inc., Jon E. Goodrich, Robert
P. Gould, and James Kardas shall:
A. Within thirty (30) days after service of this Order, provide a
copy of this Order to each of respondents' current principals,
officers, directors and managers, and to all personnel, agents, and
representatives having sales, advertising, or policy responsibility
with respect to the subject matter of this Order.
B. For a period of ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this
Order, provide a copy of this Order to each of respondents' principals,
officers, directors, and managers, and to all personnel, agents, and
representatives having sales, advertising, or policy responsibility
with respect to the subject matter of this Order who are associated
with respondents or any subsidiary, successor, or assign, within three
(3) days after the person assumes his or her position.
XI
It is further ordered, That respondents shall, within sixty (60)
days after the date of service of this Order, file with the Commission
a report, in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in
which it has complied with this Order.
Appendix A
[To Be Printed On MACE Security International, Inc. Letterhead]
Dear [name of distributor]: MACE Security International, Inc.
(``MSI'') and Personal Security, Inc. (``PSI'') have entered into a
consent agreement with the Federal Trade Commission (``FTC'') to
stop making certain representations about the effectiveness of MACE
with 1% CN and other chemical self-protection products unless the
representations are true and adequately substantiated. The FTC
alleged that the advertising for MACE made the following false and
unsubstantiated representations:
(1) That one spray of MACE will stop an assailant;
(2) That any contact with the upper torso by a spray of MACE will
stop an assailant; and
(3) That use of MACE will instantly stop an assailant.
The FTC also alleged that MSI and PSI, while making effectiveness
claims, failed to disclose adequately that (a) it may take several
seconds for the effects of MACE to begin, and (b) MACE may not be
effective on many assailants including those who are armed, enraged,
drugged, intoxicated, or otherwise desensitized.
Finally, the FTC alleged that MSI and PSI did not possess adequate
substantiating evidence for the following representations:
(1) That MACE will keep an assailant incapacitated for up to or
about 20 minutes;
(2) That the effectiveness of MACE for civilian self-protection has
been proven in use by police forces;
(3) That four out of five police officers in the United States
carry MACE; and
(4) That over 4000 police departments in the United States use MACE
for protection against assault.
The products covered by this consent agreement include MACE and
other chemical self-protection products. You were previously supplied
with promotional materials or advertising copy that make the above
representations. You should stop using or relying on these materials as
the basis for your own advertising unless and until we provide you with
adequate substantiation for the representations or provide new
materials or advertising copy that comply with the consent agreement.
Sincerely,
Jon E. Goodrich,
President, MACE Security International, Inc. and Personal Security,
Inc.
Appendix B
[To Be Printed On MACE Security International, Inc. Letterhead]
Dear Consumer: Our records indicate that you purchased MACE
chemical self-protection spray from our company. This is to advise
you that MACE Security International, Inc. (``MSI'') and Personal
Security, Inc. (``PSI'') have entered into a consent agreement with
the Federal Trade Commission (``FTC'') to stop making certain
representations about the effectiveness of MACE with 1% CN and other
chemical self-protection products unless the representations are
true and adequately substantiated. The FTC alleged that the
advertising for MACE made the following false and unsubstantiated
representations:
(1) That one spray of MACE will stop an assailant;
(2) That any contact with the upper torso by a spray of MACE will
stop an assailant; and
(3) That use of MACE will instantly stop an assailant.
The FTC also alleged that MSI and PSI, while making effectiveness
claims, failed to disclose adequately that 1) it may take several
seconds for the effects of MACE to begin, and 2) MACE may not be
effective on many assailants including those who are armed, enraged,
drugged, intoxicated, or otherwise desensitized.
Finally, the FTC alleged that MSI and PSI did not possess adequate
substantiating evidence for the following representations:
(1) That MACE will keep an assailant incapacitated for up to or
about 20 minutes;
(2) That the effectiveness of MACE for civilian self-protection has
been proven in use by police forces;
(3) That four out of five police officers in the United States
carry MACE; and
(4) That over 4000 police departments in the United States use MACE
for protection against assault.
The products covered by this consent agreement include MACE and
other chemical self-protection products. We advise that you limit your
use of MACE in accordance with these restrictions:
(1) MACE may not be effective against armed assailants.
(2) MACE may take several seconds to work.
(3) MACE may not work on enraged, drugged, or intoxicated
assailants.
Sincerely,
Jon E. Goodrich,
President, MACE Security International, Inc. and Personal Security,
Inc.
Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To Aid Public Comment
The Federal Trade Commission has accepted an agreement to a
proposed consent order from MACE Security International, Inc.
(``MSI''), Personal Security, Inc. (``PSI''), Jon E. Goodrich, Robert
P. Gould, and James Kardas. Proposed respondents are marketers of self-
defense products, and their MACE brand self-protection spray that
contains 1% phenylchloromethylketone (CN) was the subject of this
investigation.
The proposed consent order has been placed on the public record for
sixty (60) days for the reception of comments by interested persons.
Comments received during this period will become part of the public
record. After sixty (60) days, the Commission will again review the
agreement or make final the agreement's proposed order.
The Commission's complaint charges that the proposed respondents
made the following false and unsubstantiated representations about MACE
with 1% CN:
(1) That one spray of MACE will stop an assailant;
(2) That any contact with the upper torso by a spray of MACE will
stop an assailant; and
(3) That use of MACE will instantly stop an assailant.
The proposed consent order prohibits proposed respondents from
making such efficacy claims unless the claims are true and respondents
possess and rely upon competent and reliable evidence. (Part I).
The Commission also alleged that proposed respondents did not
possess adequate substantiating evidence for the following
representations at the time they made the representations:
(1) That MACE will keep an assailant incapacitated for up to or
about 20 minutes;
(2) That the effectiveness of MACE for civilian self-protection has
been proven in use by police forces;
(3) That four out of five police officers in the United States
carry MACE; and
(4) That over 4000 police departments in the United States use MACE
for protection against assault.
The proposed consent order prohibits proposed respondents from
making such claims unless they possess and rely upon competent and
reliable evidence. (Part II). Similarly, the proposed consent order
prohibits claims about the relative or absolute efficacy, benefits,
usage, performance, or other attributes of MACE or any chemical self-
protection product, unless proposed respondents possess and rely upon
competent and reliable evidence. (Part III).
Further, the Commission alleged that proposed respondents, while
making effectiveness claims, failed to disclose adequately that (1) it
may take several seconds for the effects of MACE to begin, and (2) MACE
may not be effective on many assailants including those who are armed,
enraged, drugged, intoxicated, or otherwise desensitized.
The proposed consent order seeks to address the alleged failure to
adequately disclose these limitations in three ways. First, the
proposed order prohibits proposed respondents from making claims about
the effectiveness of MACE or any substantially similar product unless
the following statement is disclosed clearly and prominently in print
advertisements:
CAUTION: MACE MAY NOT BE EFFECTIVE AGAINST ARMED ASSAILANTS.
MACE may take several seconds to work and may not work on enraged,
drugged, or intoxicated people.
A similar but shorter disclosure is required for television,
cablecast, videotape, or radio advertisements. (Part IV).
Second, the proposed order requires that a product insert provide
the same cautionary language. Proposed respondents will be permitted to
continue to use for a limited time certain previously printed product
materials. (Part V).
Third, the proposed order requires that proposed respondents send
certain past purchasers written notice of the terms of the proposed
order. (Part VI).
The purpose of this analysis is to facilitate public comment on the
proposed order, and it is not intended to constitute an official
interpretation of the agreement and proposed order or to modify in any
way their terms.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 94-1371 Filed 1-19-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.