Editing Federal Trade Commission (section)

=== Obama administration ===
<!-- 2009–2016 -->

During the Obama Administration, [[Jon Leibowitz]] served as the Chair. 

==== Sears Holdings case ====
<!-- Jun 2009 -->
In the 2009 case ''[[In the Matter of Sears Holdings Management Corp.]]'', the FTC alleged that a research software program provided by Sears was deceptive because it collected information about nearly all online behavior, a fact that was only disclosed in legalese, buried within the end user license agreement.<ref>{{cite web |title=Sears Complaint |url=http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0823099/090604searscomplaint.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090605203428/http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0823099/090604searscomplaint.pdf |archive-date=June 5, 2009 |access-date=August 14, 2012}}</ref> The FTC secured a consent decree in the case.

==== Money Now Funding / Cash4Businesses case ====
In September 2013, a federal court closed an elusive [[business opportunity]] scheme on the request of the FTC, namely "Money Now Funding"/"Cash4Businesses".<ref>{{Cite web |date=2013-09-26 |title=FTC Halts Elusive Business Opportunity Scheme |url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2013/09/ftc-halts-elusive-business-opportunity-scheme |access-date=2019-02-08 |website=Federal Trade Commission |language=en}}</ref> The FTC alleged that the defendants misrepresented potential earnings, violated the [[National Do Not Call Registry|National Do Not Call Register]], and violated the FTC's Business Opportunity Rule in preventing a fair consumer evaluation of the business.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Case 2:13-cv-01583-ROS Document 95 Filed 09/13/13 |url=https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cases/130926rosemarketingpi-hobbs.pdf |website=FTC}}</ref> This was one of the first definitive actions taken by any regulator against a company engaging in transaction laundering, where almost US$6 million were processed illicitly.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2018-03-15 |title=What is transaction laundering and what is the Industry doing about it? |url=https://www.paymentscardsandmobile.com/what-is-transaction-laundering-and-what-is-the-industry-doing-about-it/ |access-date=2019-02-08 |website=Payments Cards & Mobile |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2017-09-13 |title=FTC Targets Transaction Laundering In Landmark Lawsuit |url=http://evercompliant.com/ftc-targets-transaction-laundering-in-landmark-lawsuit/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190209180130/http://evercompliant.com/ftc-targets-transaction-laundering-in-landmark-lawsuit/ |archive-date=February 9, 2019 |access-date=2019-02-08 |website=EverCompliant |language=en-US}}</ref>

In December 2018, two defendants, Nikolas Mihilli and Dynasty Merchants, LLC, settled with the FTC.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2018-12-10 |title=Two Defendants Settle Allegations in 'Money Now Funding' Credit Card Charge Laundering Scheme |url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2018/12/two-defendants-settle-allegations-money-now-funding-credit-card |access-date=2019-02-08 |website=Federal Trade Commission |language=en}}</ref> They were banned from processing credit card transactions, though the initial monetary judgment of $5.8 million was suspended due to the defendant's inability to pay.

==== OMICS Publishing Group case ====
In 2016, the FTC launched action against the academic journal publisher [[OMICS Publishing Group]] for producing [[predatory journals]] and organizing [[predatory conferences]].<ref>{{cite news |date=September 2, 2016 |title=FTC sues OMICS group: Are predatory publishers' days numbered? |url=https://www.statnews.com/2016/09/02/predatory-publishers/ |access-date=October 22, 2016 |newspaper=STAT News}}</ref> This action, partly in response to ongoing pressure from the academic community,<ref name="Straumsheim">{{cite news |last=Straumsheim |first=Carl |date=August 29, 2016 |title=Federal Trade Commission begins to crack down on 'predatory' publishers |url=https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/08/29/federal-trade-commission-begins-crack-down-predatory-publishers |access-date=October 22, 2016 |newspaper=[[Inside Higher Ed]]}}</ref> is the first action taken by the FTC against an academic journal publisher.<ref name="RWatch">{{cite web |last=McCook |first=Alison |date=August 26, 2016 |title=U.S. government agency sues publisher, charging it with deceiving researchers |url=http://retractionwatch.com/2016/08/26/u-s-government-group-sues-publisher-charging-it-with-deceiving-researchers/ |access-date=November 2, 2016 |publisher=[[Retraction Watch]]}}</ref><ref name="OMICS-Group">{{cite web |date=1 May 2018 |title=OMICS Group Inc. |url=https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/152-3113/federal-trade-commission-v-omics-group-inc |access-date=15 January 2019 |website=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref>

The complaint alleges that the defendants have been "deceiving academics and researchers about the nature of its publications and hiding publication fees ranging from hundreds to thousands of dollars".<ref name="FTC">{{cite web |last1=Shonka |first1=David C. |last2=Rusu |first2=Ioana |last3=Ashe |first3=Gregory A. |last4=Bogden |first4=Daniel G. |author-link4=Daniel Bogden |last5=Welsh |first5=Blaine T. |date=August 25, 2016 |title=Case No. 2:16-cv-02022 &ndash; Complaint for Permanent Injunction and Other Equitable Relief |url=https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/160826omicscmpt.pdf |access-date=October 22, 2016 |website=Case 2:16-cv-02022 |publisher=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref> It additionally notes that "OMICS regularly advertises conferences featuring academic experts who were never scheduled to appear in order to attract registrants"<ref name="Straumsheim" /> and that attendees "spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on registration fees and travel costs to attend these scientific conferences."<ref name="FTC" /> Manuscripts are also sometimes held hostage, with OMICS refusing to allow submissions to be withdrawn and thereby preventing resubmission to another journal for consideration.<ref name="RWatch" /> Library scientist [[Jeffrey Beall]] has described OMICS as among the most egregious of [[predatory publisher]]s.<ref name="Straumsheim" /><ref>{{cite web |last=Bailey |first=Jonathan |date=September 12, 2016 |title=Federal Trade Commission Targeting Predatory Publishers |url=http://www.ithenticate.com/plagiarism-detection-blog/federal-trade-commission-targeting-predatory-publishers |access-date=November 2, 2016 |work=[[iThenticate]] &ndash; Plagiarism Blog}}</ref> In November 2017, a federal court in the [[United States District Court for the District of Nevada|Court for the District of Nevada]] granted a preliminary injunction that: 

{{quote|prohibits the defendants from making misrepresentations regarding their academic journals and conferences, including that specific persons are editors of their journals or have agreed to participate in their conferences.  It also prohibits the defendants from falsely representing that their journals engage in peer review, that their journals are included in any academic journal indexing service or any measurement of the extent to which their journals are cited. It also requires that the defendants clearly and conspicuously disclose all costs associated with submitting or publishing articles in their journals.<ref name="OMICS-prelim-injunction">{{cite web |date=22 November 2017 |title=FTC Halts the Deceptive Practices of Academic Journal Publishers |url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2017/11/ftc-halts-deceptive-practices-academic-journal-publishers |access-date=15 January 2019 |publisher=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref>}}

In April 2019, the court imposed a fine of US$50.1 million on OMICS companies for unfair and deceptive business practices.<ref name="ftc case">{{Cite web |date=26 August 2016 |title=OMICS Group Inc. |url=http://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/cases-proceedings/152-3113-omics-group-inc |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220323144329/https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/cases-proceedings/152-3113-omics-group-inc |archive-date=2022-03-23 |access-date=2022-03-23 |publisher=Federal Trade Commission |language=en}}</ref><ref name="Hindu.2019">{{Cite news |last=Prasad |first=R. |date=3 April 2019 |title=Hyderabad-based OMICS fined $50 million for 'unfair, deceptive business practices' |language=en-IN |work=The Hindu |url=https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/hyderabad-based-omics-fined-50-million-for-unfair-deceptive-business-practices/article26724904.ece |access-date=2022-03-23 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220323214944/https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/hyderabad-based-omics-fined-50-million-for-unfair-deceptive-business-practices/article26724904.ece |archive-date=2022-03-23 |issn=0971-751X|url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=11 October 2011 |title=Brief of the Federal Trade Commission |url=https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/omics_ca9_ftc_answering_brief_10-11-19.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211104143419/https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/omics_ca9_ftc_answering_brief_10-11-19.pdf |archive-date=2021-11-04 |access-date=2021-11-04 |publisher=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref>