UMAX Technologies, Inc.; Analysis to Aid Public Comment

AGENCY:

Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION:

Proposed consent agreement.

SUMMARY:

The consent agreement in this matter settles alleged violations of federal law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or practices or unfair methods of competition. The attached Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the draft complaint that accompanies the consent agreement and the terms of the consent order—embodied in the consent agreement—that would settle these allegations.

DATES:

Comments must be received on or before February 9, 2000.

ADDRESSES:

Comments should be directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary, Room 159, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20580.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael Dershowitz or Joel Winston, FTC/S-4002, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20580. (202) 326-3158 or 326-3153.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Pursuant to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 38 Stat. 7231, 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 above-captioned 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 thirty (30) days. The following Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes the terms of the consent agreement, and the allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the full text of the consent agreement package can be obtained from the FTC Home Page (for January 10, 2000), on the World Wide Web, at “http://www.ftc.gov/​os/​actions97.htm. A paper copy can be obtained from the FTC Public Reference Room, Room H-130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20580, either in person or by calling (202) 326-3627.

Public comment is invited. Comments should be directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary, Room 159, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20580. Two paper copies of each comment should be filed, and should be accompanied, if possible, by a 31/2 inch diskette containing an electronic copy of the comment. 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 section 4.9(b)(6)(ii) of the Commission's Rules of Practice (16 CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii)).

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to Aid Public Comment

The Federal Trade Commission has accepted, subject to final approval, an agreement containing a consent order from respondent UMAX Technologies, Inc. (“UMAX”).

The proposed consent order has been placed on the public record for thirty (30) days for reception of comments by interested persons. Comments received during this period will become part of the public record. After thirty (30) days, the Commission will again review the agreement and the comments received and will decide whether it should withdraw from the agreement or make final the agreement's proposed order.

UMAX advertises, labels and sells various types of computer scanners. This matter concerns allegedly deceptive rebate advertising claims made in conjunction with the sale of computer scanners. The Commission's proposed complaint alleges that UMAX falsely represented that purchasers of its Astra 1220P scanner, for example, would receive a $30.00 cash rebate, and that purchasers of its Astra 1220S scanner, for example, would receive a $50.00 cash rebate, within 12 weeks of UMAX's receipt of purchaser's rebate requests. The complaint alleges that in many instances purchasers received their rebates one to five months late.

The proposed consent order contains provisions designed to prevent respondent from engaging in similar acts and practices in the future.

Part I of the proposed order prohibits respondent from misrepresenting the time in which any cash rebate, or rebate in the form of credit towards future purchases, will be mailed to consumers. It also prohibits respondent from failing to provide such rebates within the time specified, or if no time is specified, within thirty days.

Part I of the proposed order also prohibits respondent from violating any provision of the FTC's Mail Order Rule in connection with rebates in the form of merchandise. Among other things, the Mail Order Rule prohibits marketers from failing to provide rebates in the form of merchandise within the time they specify for delivery, or if no time is specified, within thirty days, unless they offer consumers the option of consenting to a delay or canceling the rebate request and promptly receiving reasonable cash compensation instead of the merchandise originally offered. Finally, Part I of the proposed order similarly prohibits respondent from failing to provide rebates in the form of services or any other consideration (other than cash, credit towards future purchases, or merchandise) within the time it specifies for delivery, or if no time is specified, within thirty days, unless it offers consumers the option of consenting to a delay or canceling the rebate request and promptly receiving reasonable cash compensation instead of the rebate originally offered.

Part II of the proposed order requires respondent to maintain copies of all materials relied upon in making any representation covered by this order.

Part III of the proposed order requires respondent to distribute copies of the order to various officers, agents and employees of respondent.

Part IV of the proposed order requires respondent to notify the Commission of any changes in corporate structure that might affect compliance with the order.

Part V of the proposed order requires respondent to file with the Commission one or more reports detailing compliance with the order.

Part VI of the proposed order is a “sunset” provision, dictating that the order will terminate twenty years from the date it is issued or twenty years after a complaint is filed in federal court, by either the United States or the FTC, alleging any violation of the order.

The purpose of this analysis is to facilitate public comment on the proposed order. It is not intended to constitute an official interpretation of the agreement and proposed order or to modify in any way their terms.