Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 2867

1Raymond M. Taylor, Law Book Consumers Need

Protection, 55 A.B.A.J. 553 (1969). 2The Commission’s request for public comment

elicited comments from: (1) Linda DeVaun,

Technical Services Librarian for Sonnenschein,

Nath & Rosenthal, Chicago, IL (‘‘DeVaun’’), #00001;

(2) Robert L. Oakley, Washington Affairs

Representative, American Association of Law

Libraries (Mr. Oakley is also director of the law

library and professor of law at the Georgetown

University Law Center) (‘‘AALL’’), #00002; (3) Carl

C. Monk, Executive Director, Association of

American Law Schools (‘‘AALS’’), #00003; (4) Lorna

Tang, University of Chicago Law Library (‘‘Tang’’),

#00004; and (5) Kenneth H. Ryesky, attorney and

adjunct professor of law (‘‘Ryesky’’), #00005. these

comments are on the public record in file number

P994243 as document numbers B25345900001

through B25346100005. They are cited in this

notice as #00001, #00002, etc. The comments are

available for viewing in Room 130 at the Federal

Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,

Washington, DC 20580, from 8:30 am to 5 pm,

Monday–Friday. 3 DeVaun, #00001; ALL, #00002; Tang, #00004;

Ryesky, #00005.

4 DeVaun, #00001.

5AALL, #00002, at 7.

6Tang, #00004.

7See Federal Trade commission Policy Statement

on Deception, appended to Cliffdale Associates,

Inc., 103 F.T.C. 110, 174–184 (1984); and Federal

Trade Commission Policy Statement on Unfairness,

appended to International Harvester Co., 104 F.T.C.

949, 1070–76 (1984).

or imprisoned not more than one year,

or both.

Daniel S. Goldin,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 00–1126 Filed 1–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7510–01–P

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

16 CFR PART 256

Rescission of Guides for the Law Book

Industry

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: On March 18, 1999, the

Commission published a Federal

Register document initiating the

regulatory review of the Federal Trade

Commission’s (‘‘Commission’’) Guides

for the Law Book Industry (‘‘Law Book

Guides’’ or ‘‘Guides’’) and seeking

public comment. The Commission has

now completed its review, and this

document announces its decision to

rescind the Guides and removes the

Guides from the Code of Federal

Regulations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 19, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of this

notice should be sent to the Consumer

Response Center, Room 130, Federal

Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania

Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20580.

The notice is available on the Internet

at the Commission’s website, http://

www.ftc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Edwin Rodriguez, Attorney, Federal

Trade Commission, Division of

Enforcement, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue

NW, S–4302, Washington, DC 20580,

(202) 326–3147, e-mail

Erodriguez@ftc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

As part of the Commission’s ongoing

review of all current Commission rules

and guides, the Commission published

a Federal Register notice on March 18,

1999, 64 FR 13369, seeking comments

about the Law Book Guides’ overall

costs and benefits, and the continuing

need for the Guides. The Law Book

Guides contain 17 sections that provide

guidance regarding the sale of legal

reference materials to the legal

profession, law schools, and other

consumers. The 17 sections cover

practices ranging from the marketing of

legal reference materials to consumers,

to the supplementation of these

materials, and billing practices

employed by sellers, and specify

detailed disclosures that should be

made in direct mail promotional

materials and oral representations

soliciting the sale of legal reference

materials.

The Commission issued the Guides in

1975, 40 FR 33436, to assist the legal

publication industry with compliance

with section 5 of the Federal Trade

Commission Act (‘‘FTC Act’’), 15 U.S.C.

45. The Commission issued the Guides

following consideration of public

comments submitted in response to a

request from purchasers and their

representatives, such as the American

Association of Law Libraries. Earlier,

Raymond M. Taylor, then Librarian for

the North Carolina Supreme Court, had

published an article detailing alleged

abuses in the legal publishing industry.1

These abuses include practices such as

putting new titles and new binders on

old material, misrepresenting that

certain publications are ‘‘new’’ or

‘‘revised or enlarged,’’ misrepresenting

the jurisdictional application of

publications, adding remotely related

books to established sets to assure their

automatic sale, failing to disclose prices,

failing to issue supplements for

publications that otherwise soon would

become obsolete. The article suggested,

among other things, that the

Commission should prescribe

appropriate practices that industry

should follow in the publication,

advertising, and sale of legal

publications.

II. Comments Received

The Commission received five

comments in response to the Federal

Register notice.2 All of the comments

state that the Guides serve a useful

purpose and that there is a continuing

need for them. Four comments assert

that there continue to be abuses or other

problems in the legal publications

industry,3 such as failing to disclose in

advertisements the manner in which

electronic versions of legal reference

materials vary from their print

counterparts,4 failing to disclose prices

in advertisements,5 or sending and

billing customers for materials only

remotely related to what they have

purchased.6 DeVaun states that mergers

in the legal publishing industry have

caused the accuracy of information

provided by legal publishers’ customer

service personnel to suffer. Several

comments suggest that the Commission

adopt revisions to the Guides to

recognize certain current market

practices, including the distribution and

licensing of electronic legal resources

(e.g., those provided on CD–ROM or by

other electronic means).

III. Commission’s Determinations

After extensive review of the Guides

and their effect on the legal reference

industry and purchasers of legal

reference materials, the Commission has

decided that the Guides no longer are

necessary to promote compliance with

section 5 of the FTC Act. For the reasons

set forth below, the Commission has

determined to rescind the Guides.

First, the Guides are overly regulatory

in that they include significantly more

detail regarding suggested disclosures

and other practices than the

Commission would promulgate today.

Further, repealing the Guides would not

impair the Commission’s ability to

prosecute abuses in the legal reference

materials industry, if necessary. Under

the FTC Act the Commission may seek

administrative or federal district court

orders against companies or individuals

who engage in unfair or deceptive

practices,7prohibiting future violations,

and providing other relief such as

consumer redress, disgorgement of illgotten gains, consumer notification, and

civil penalties, in some cases. The

Commission, for example, could

prosecute sellers who failed to clearly

and conspicuously disclose material

information or sent or billed customers

for unordered materials. Such practices

would violate section 5 of the FTC Act,

or section 3009(a) of the Postal

Reorganization Act of 1970, 39 U.S.C.

3009, which declares that mailing, or

2868 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

8See 35 FR 14328 (1970). Under this law, sellers,

other than charitable organizations soliciting

contributions, may not ship unordered merchandise

to consumers unless the recipient has expressly

agreed to receive it or unless it is clearly identified

as a gift, free sample, or the like. In addition, sellers

cannot try to obtain payment for or the return of the

unordered merchandise. Consumers who receive

unordered merchandise are legally entitled to treat

the merchandise as a gift. The Postal Reorganization

Act refers to ‘‘mailing’’ of unordered merchandise.

The Commission, however, has explained that the

application of Section 5 of the FTC Act to such

practices is not limited to unordered merchandise

distributed through the U.S. mail, 43 FR 4113

(1978).

9E.g., Hachette Book Group USA, Inc., No.

39CV00116 (D. Conn. 1994) (settlement in which

FTC charged that defendants failed to notify

consumers that they would receive yearbooks or

supplements unless they returned a mail

cancellation card, failed to obtain consumers’

agreement to return cancellation coards if they did

not want the merchandise, and mailed merchandise

and bills to consumers who had not placed orders;

settlement included a $200,000 civil penalty); Field

Publications Ltd. Partnership, No. H–90–932 PCD

(D. Conn. 1990) (settlement in which FTC charged

that Field shipped unordered books to subscribers

who had agreed to receive another series of books

as part of a continuity plan; settlement included a

$175,000 civil penalty); Standard Reference Library,

Inc. 77 F.T.C. 969, 976 (1970) (consent order

prohibited respondents from representing that

consumers’ failure to return rejection cards or take

any affirmative action to prevent the shipment of

merchandise constituted a request to receive

merchandise where consumers had not agreed to

take on that obligation).

billing for, unordered merchandise

constitutes a violation of section 5 of the

FTC Act.8 Prior cases brought by the

Commission to enforce the Postal

Reorganization Act and Section 5 of the

FTC Act provide guidance to industry

regarding the illegality of sending and

attempting to collect for unordered

merchandise.9

Second, guides are particularly useful

when they resolve uncertainty over

what claims are likely to be considered

‘‘unfair or deceptive’’ under Section 5.

Several of the provisions in Guides,

however, do little more than advise

against making untrue or deceptive

claims, or failing to disclose material

information where silence would be

deceptive.

Moreover, the Commission

understands from the comments that the

industry is quickly evolving into

electronic media and increasingly using

licensing techniques to distribute legal

publications, which present new

technological and intellectual property

issues for consideration. Thus, although

the Guides provide overly detailed

suggestions regarding presale

disclosures, they are so narrowly

focused that they do not include these

or other new and perhaps more

important areas of concern to sellers and

purchasers.

Third, there appears to be no

justification for singling out this

particular industry for unusually

detailed and specific advice, or why

legal reference material purchasers are

in greater need of protection than

purchasers in other industries. Industry

associations, or purchaser associations

such as AALL or AALS, can adopt

guides of their own to educate sellers

and purchasers about the information

purchasers of legal reference materials

need to make purchasing decisions.

Indeed, eliminating the Guides may

provide the incentive for these

associations to develop their own guides

that address their members’ most

important concerns.

Based on comments, the Commission

has concluded that there no longer is a

need for the Guides. The Commission,

therefore, has rescinded the Guides.

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 256

Advertising, Law, Trade practices.

PART 256—[REMOVED]

The Commission, under the authority

of Sections 5(a) and 6(g) of the Federal

Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 45(a)

and 46(g), amends chapter I of title 16

in the Code of Federal Regulations by

removing part 256.

By direction of the Ccommission.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–994 Filed 1–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Customs Service

19 CFR Part 4

[T.D. 00–4 ]

RIN 1515–AC29

Boarding of Vessels in the United

States

AGENCY: U.S. Customs Service,

Department of the Treasury.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document, as a primary

focus, amends the Customs Regulations

regarding the boarding of vessels

arriving in ports of the United States.

These amendments are made to

implement amendments to the

underlying statutory authority enacted

as part of the Customs Modernization

Act, as well as to reflect policy

determinations necessitated as a result

of those amendments. To this same end,

certain general amendments are made to

the regulations concerning vessel entry

and clearance as well as the issuance of

permits to lade and unlade

merchandise.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 18, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Legal aspects: Larry L. Burton, Office of

Regulations and Rulings, 202–927–1287.

Operational aspects: Robert Watt,

Office of Field Operations, 202–927–

3654.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On December 8, 1993, amendments to

certain Customs and navigation laws

became effective as the result of the

North American Free Trade Agreement

Implementation Act (Pub. L. 103–182),

Title VI of which is popularly known as

the Customs Modernization Act (the

Act). Sections 653 and 656 of the Act

significantly amended the statutes

governing the entry and the lading and

unlading of vessels in the United States.

These operations are governed,

respectively, by sections 434 and 448 of

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19

U.S.C. 1434 and 1448).

Prior to the subject amendments, the

entry of vessels of the United States and

vessels of foreign countries had been

governed by separate statutes (19 U.S.C.

1434 and 1435), neither of which

included elements concerning

preliminary vessel entry or the boarding

of vessels. The Act repealed 19 U.S.C.

1435 and amended 19 U.S.C. 1434 to

provide for the entry of American and

foreign-documented vessels under the

same statute. Additionally, the amended

19 U.S.C. 1434 now provides authority

for the promulgation of regulations

regarding preliminary vessel entry, and

while neither mandating boarding for all

vessels nor specifying that optional

boarding must be accomplished at any

particular stage of the vessel entry

process, the amended law does require

that a sufficient number of vessels be

boarded to ensure compliance with the

laws enforced by the Customs Service.

The general authority provided for

Customs to board vessels is found in

section 581, Tariff Act of 1930, as

amended (19 U.S.C. 1581). Prior to

amendment, 19 U.S.C. 1448 as

previously cited had linked the granting

of preliminary vessel entry to a

mandatory boarding requirement and

physical presentation of manifest

documents to a Customs boarding

officer. The amended 19 U.S.C. 1448 no

longer contains provisions regarding

preliminary vessel entry, vessel

boarding, or manifest presentation, all of

which are now provided for in other

statutes. The statute now provides that

Customs may electronically issue

permits to lade or unlade merchandise