FTC Watch Day 2: Texas Car Dealers to Pay $85,000 Civil Penalty, No Action on Google Advertising Fraud

Yep, the FTC is all over those Texas Car Dealers, but still no action on duped advertisers on YouTube.  We just can’t imagine why that is.

Here’s what the always vigilant Obama FTC caught the car dealers doing down in Texas:

According to the FTC, New World Auto Imports Inc., New World Auto Imports of Rockwall Inc. and Hampton Two Auto Corporation concealed sale and lease terms that added significant costs or limited who could qualify for vehicles at advertised prices, in violation of a 2014 order.

In a TV ad, for example, the dealers offered two cars for “under $200 per month,” but in fine print that appeared for two seconds, disclosed that the offer applied only to leases, not sales, and required a $1,999 payment at lease signing. One dealer mailed ads claiming a new car could be purchased for $179 per month, but in print too small to read without magnification, disclosed that $1,999 would be due up front, along with tax, title and license fees, and that $8,271 would be due at the end of a 38-month financing term.

The FTC’s complaint also cited a TV ad targeted at people with major credit problems, such as repossessions or foreclosures. The ad touted vehicles for $250 per month, but in fine print disclosed that the offer was based on a 4.25 annual percentage rate that few, if any, consumers with such major credit issues could obtain. In addition, the FTC alleged that the dealers advertised credit and lease terms without clearly and conspicuously disclosing information required by federal law, and failed to keep records required by the 2014 order.

Just shocking, right?  But it appears that duping advertisers on YouTube…like, oh, the President of the United States…is OK.

campaign-admazda-ad-on-terror-video-close-up

And then there’s Mazda’s ads that monetized videos of Anwar Al Awaki preaching whatever it is he preached.

Pales by comparison to the important work that the FTC is doing ferreting out those Texas car dealers.

We guess the FTC’s lawyers–the Google Justice Department–were too busy screwing songwriters on behalf of the MIC Coalition.

Read the press release–yes, that’s right, the FTC press release–on FTC.gov

Guest Post by Stephen Carlisle: ASCAP and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad DOJ Decision That’s Going to Create Chaos in the Music Industry

Professor Stephen Carlisle gives us a point by point refutation of the DOJ’s astroturf position on 100% licensing.

via Guest Post by Stephen Carlisle: ASCAP and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad DOJ Decision That’s Going to Create Chaos in the Music Industry — MUSIC • TECHNOLOGY • POLICY

Watch this Space: MTP Podcast on 100% Licensing with Michelle Lewis and Kay Hanley of Songwriters of North America, David Lowery, Chris Castle coming soon

Next week we will continue discussion of the Department of Justice [sic] ruling on 100% licensing and partial withdrawals from the songwriter’s point of view. Participants will be songwriters Michelle Lewis and Kay Hanley of Songwriters of North America, David Lowery and Chris Castle. Watch this space for links to the podcast when it is completed, probably August […]

via Watch this Space: MTP Podcast on 100% Licensing with Michelle Lewis and Kay Hanley of Songwriters of North America, David Lowery, Chris Castle coming soon — MUSIC • TECHNOLOGY • POLICY

DOJ Engages Completely Juvenile Argument Against Copyright Office in Defense of Corrupt 100% Licensing Rule — The Trichordist

Getting the right result for our corporate masters. We need to get the OIG to investigate or even recommend the disbanding of the DOJ Antitrust Litigation Section III over their handling of the 100% song licensing rule. This is getting totally ridiculous. First: there is the very real chance of corruption here as this appears […]

via DOJ Engages Completely Juvenile Argument Against Copyright Office in Defense of Corrupt 100% Licensing Rule — The Trichordist

DOJ 100% Licensing Rule: An UnFair Tax on Hip Hop and Works With Samples? — The Trichordist

Let’s look at the implications of the DOJ 100% rule for the writers of the 5th most popular Hip Hop Song in the US this week. These are the four samples in For Free, by DJ Khaled featuring Drake. Each of those sampled songs also has multiple writers. Consequently the list of writers for […]

via DOJ 100% Licensing Rule: An UnFair Tax on Hip Hop and Works With Samples? — The Trichordist

@musictechpolicy: How Google Took Over the Justice Department Antitrust Division: The Timeline of Renata B. Hesse

If you have been following the machinations by the Obama Justice Department [sic] over amending the ASCAP and BMI consent decrees,  you may have found yourself wondering who was responsible for rejecting the good faith efforts of the songwriting community in favor of a cynical back room deal with multinational tech companies and broadcasters.  I have some thoughts about this, and ask your indulgence–it will take some of your time to read this timeline, but I think you’ll be glad you did.

As you read, ask yourself this question:  If it looks, acts and quacks, is it corrupt?  And if it is, what can you do about it?

Read the post on MusicTechPolicy

@stuartdredge: US PUBLISHING INDUSTRY IN UPROAR OVER DOJ LICENSING PLANS

The DoJ isn’t the only target for criticism: Google is also under attack, at a time of already-inflamed tension between the company and music rightsholders.

NMPA boss David Israelite recently made explicit reference to the DoJ’s “career lawyers who were never elected nor confirmed to their positions, led by a lawyer who previously represented Google”, while lawyer Chris Castle returned to a regular theme for his Music Technology Policy blog: the links between Google and the US administration and Barack Obama’s “miserable record on protecting the property rights of creators to Google’s benefit”.

Read the post on Music Ally