The legal library gives you easy access to the FTC’s case information and other official legal, policy, and guidance documents.
Statement of Commissioner Alvaro Martin Bedoya Regarding the Policy Statement on Education Technology and COPPA
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan Regarding the Endorsement Guides Review
Testimony of Chair Lina M. Khan Before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government
Concurring Statement of Commissioner Christine S. Wilson in the Matter of R360 Network LLC
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan in the Matter of R360 Network LLC
Written Submission on the Public Interest of Chair Lina M. Khan and Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter in the Matter of Certain UMTS and LTE Cellular Communication Modules
2205001 Informal Interpretation
2205005 Informal Interpretation
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Christine S. Wilson regarding the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Energy Labeling Rule
2205002 Informal Interpretation
AdvoCare International, L.P.
Multi-level marketer AdvoCare International, L P and its former chief executive officer agreed to pay $150 million and be banned from the multi-level marketing business to resolve Federal Trade Commission charges that the company operated an illegal pyramid scheme that deceived consumers into believing that they could earn significant income as "distributors" of its health and wellness products. Two top promoters also settled charges that they promoted the illegal pyramid scheme and misled consumers about their income potential, agreeing to a multi-level marketing ban and a judgment of $4 million that will be suspended when they surrender substantial assets.
Everalbum, Inc., In the Matter of
Everalbum settled Federal Trade Commission allegations that it deceived consumers about its use of facial recognition technology and its retention of photos and videos of users who deactivated their accounts.
Frontier Communications Corporation
The FTC along with law enforcement agencies from six states, sued Frontier Communications alleging that the company did not provide many consumers with Internet service at the speeds it promised them, and charged many of them for more expensive and higher-speed service than Frontier actually provided.