Editing Tobacco industry (section)

==Tobacco control==
On May 11, 2004, the U.S. became the 108th country to sign the [[World Health Organization]]'s [[WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control|Global Treaty on Tobacco Control]]. This treaty places broad restrictions on the sale, advertising, shipment, and taxation of tobacco products. The U.S. has not yet ratified this treaty in its [[United States Senate|Senate]] and does not yet have a schedule for doing so.

Most recently, there has been discussion within the tobacco control community of transforming the tobacco industry through the replacement of tobacco [[corporation]]s by other types of business organizations that can be established to provide tobacco to the market while not attempting to increase market demand.<ref>C. Callard, D. Thompson and N. Collishaw, Curing The Addiction To Profits: A Supply-Side Approach To Phasing Out Tobacco (Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2005)</ref>

On February 20, 2007, the [[US Supreme Court]] ruled that the [[Altria Group]] (formerly Philip Morris) did not have to pay $79.5 million in punitive damages awarded to Mayola Williams in a 1999 Oregon court ruling, when she sued Phillip Morris for responsibility in the cancer death of her husband, Jesse Williams.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna17239146 |title=Supreme Court throws out Philip Morris verdict – Business – US business – NBC News |publisher=NBC News |date=2007-02-20 |access-date=2012-03-13}}</ref>  The Supreme Court's decision overturns a ruling made by the [[Oregon Supreme Court]] that upheld the award.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://docket.medill.northwestern.edu/archives/003687.php |title=Philip Morris USA v. Williams, Mayola – Medill – on the Docket |access-date=2007-02-20 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070204130206/http://docket.medill.northwestern.edu/archives/003687.php |archive-date=2007-02-04 }}</ref>

On April 3, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit threw out an $800 billion class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of a group or class of people who smoked light cigarettes. The plaintiffs' lawyers were confident that they would be able to win this suit due to the success of ''Schwab v. Philip Morris''<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14138|title=US: Tobacco Makers Lose Key Ruling on Latest Suites|author=Johnston, David Kay and Melanie Warner|newspaper=New York Times|date=2006-09-26|access-date=2008-04-03}}</ref> wherein tobacco companies were found guilty of fraud-like charges because they were selling the idea that light cigarettes were safer than regular cigarettes. The ruling by the three-judge panel will not allow the suit to be pursued as a class, but instead need proof for why individual smokers chose light cigarettes over regular cigarettes.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/03/business/03cnd-tobacco.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin|title=Suit on Light Cigarettes Is Thrown Out|author=Saul, Stephanie|newspaper=New York Times|date=2008-04-03|access-date=2008-04-03}}</ref>