Monday, December 28, 2020
Assessing the privacy and cybersecurity practices of third-party service providers is critical not only for employee personal information, but also for confidential and personal information pertaining to an organization’s business and its clients, customers, patients, students, etc. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a settlement on December 15 with a financial institution that it claimed failed to oversee the data security practices of one of its third-party service providers as required under the Gramm-Leach Bliley Act’s Safeguards Rule.
The Safeguards Rule requires financial institutions to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program. As part of that program, financial institutions must oversee their third-party vendors, by ensuring they are capable of implementing and maintaining appropriate safeguards for customer information, and requiring them to do so by contract. The FTC alleged the f
[co-author: Jared Ende]
On Thursday, December 17th, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
announced that it was taking action against six companies selling CBD-based products. These companies faced administrative actions by the FTC for “making a wide range of scientifically unsupported claims about their ability to treat serious health conditions,” such as cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, and pain relief. The six actions have been resolved by consent orders, each of which call for the companies to immediately stop making unsubstantiated health claims about their products, as well as notify their customers of the FTC’s order by a form letter. Five out of the six companies also had to pay a fine to the FTC, ranging from $20,000 to $85,000 the first monetary sanctions issued by the FTC against CBD product manufacturers and sellers.
On December 15th, the FTC announced
in a press release that it had reached a settlement with a mortgage industry data analytics company to resolve allegations in
the FTC’s administrative complaint that the company had failed to ensure one of its vendors was adequately securing personal data about tens of thousands of mortgage holders under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) Safeguards Rule. In the press release, Andrew Smith, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, stated that “Oversight of vendors is a critical part of any comprehensive data security program, particularly where those vendors can put sensitive consumer data at risk.”
Editorial credit: Felix Lipov / Shutterstock.com According to a Federal Trade Commission official, settlements in a law enforcement sweep against CBD marketers send a clear message to the growing sector: Don’t make spurious health claims that are unsupported by medical science.
A handful of marketers of CBD products have agreed to each pay tens of thousands of dollars to the Federal Trade Commission after they were charged with making deceptive claims.
Dubbed “Operation CBDeceit,” the sweep of actions against six sellers of CBD-containing products highlights “the first law enforcement crackdown on deceptive claims” in the CBD market, according to the government agency in a Dec. 17 news release. The sweep also reflects the FTC’s ongoing efforts to protect consumers from deceptive, false and misleading health claims in advertisements on websites and via social media.
U.S. Federal Trade Commission Lays Down the Law on Deceptive CBD Claims December 18, 2020 Contact Author Rachel Grabenhofer
Close
Sponsored
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced its first law enforcement crackdown on deceptive claims in the growing market for cannabidiol (CBD) products. Oils, balms, gummies, coffee and other goods were among the product types cited.
The FTC reports it is taking action against six sellers of CBD-containing products for making a wide range of scientifically unsupported claims about the products abilities to treat serious health conditions including cancer, heart disease, hypertension, Alzheimer’s disease and others.
The agency is requiring each of the companies and individuals behind them to stop making these unsupported claims immediately, and several will pay monetary judgments. The orders settling the FTC’s complaints also bar the respondents from similar deceptive advertising in the future, and require them to