Every year the FTC brings hundreds of cases against individuals and companies for violating consumer protection and competition laws that the agency enforces. These cases can involve fraud, scams, identity theft, false advertising, privacy violations, anti-competitive behavior and more. The Legal Library has detailed information about cases we have brought in federal court or through our internal administrative process, called an adjudicative proceeding.
General Electric Co./Vivendi Universal S.A.
Polygram Holding, Inc.; Decca Music Group Limited; UMG Recordings, Inc.; and Universal Music & Video Distribution Corp
The Commission issued an administrative complaint against Warner Communications, Inc., and several subsidiaries of Vivendi Universal S.A., charging them with illegally agreeing to fix prices for audio and video products featuring The Three Tenors. A settlement with Warner barred future agreements to fix prices or restrict advertising. After an administrative trial against Vivendi, an ALJ found that the agreement, while made in association with an otherwise legal joint venture between the companies, violated Section 5 of the FTC Act by illegally reducing competition in the U.S. market for the audio and video products cited. The Commission upheld the ruling of an administrative law judge and prohibited PolyGram from entering into any agreement with competitors to fix the prices or restrict the advertising of products they have produced independently. In July 2005, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed the Commission’s decision in Polygram Holding Inc., validating the Commission’s approach to analyzing horizontal conduct among competitors.
Diageo PLC and Vivendi Universal S.A., In the Matter of
The Commission authorized staff to file a motion for a preliminary injunction to block the proposed acquisition of Vivendi Universal S.A.’s Seagram Wine and Spirits Business on grounds that the transaction, would combine the second- and third-largest rum producers in the U.S. eliminating actual competition between the firms, leading to higher prices for rum. The Commission charged that Diageo and Bacardi together would control 95 percent of all U.S. premium rum sales, and that Diageo would have access to highly sensitive business information about Seagram's Gin, Chivas Regal Scotch whisky, The Glenlivet Scotch, and Martell Cognac, products with which Diageo is in significant competition. If Diageo were to acquire these brands, it would maintain (or have a financial interest in) virtually all popular gin sales, virtually all deluxe Scotch whisky sales, 32 percent of all single malt Scotch whisky sales, and 63 percent of all Cognac sales in the United States. Those brands, which compete directly with other brands marketed by Diageo in the United States (including Gordon's Gin, Classic Malt Scotch whiskies, Johnnie Walker Black Scotch, and Hennessy Cognac), are Seagram's Gin, Chivas Regal Scotch whisky, The Glenlivet Scotch whisky, and Martell Cognac. The parties settled the charges and by consent order, Diageo was required to divest the Malibu rum business worldwide to a Commission-approved buyer. The order also prevented Diageo from obtaining or using any competitively sensitive business information related to Seagram's Gin, Chivas Regal Scotch whisky, The Glenlivet Scotch whisky, or Martell Cognac.