24 juin 2009
Package onserts
One of the vehicles for the corrective statements is a
cigarette package onsert, which the district court ordered
Defendants to “affix to cigarette packaging, either on the outside
of or within the outer cellophane wrapping around the package
. . . in the same manner as certain Defendants, such as Philip
Morris and Brown & Williamson, have utilized package onserts
in the past.”
Defendants
object that the onserts violate the Federal Cigarette Labeling and
Advertising Act (“Labeling Act”), which provides that “[n]o
statement relating to smoking and health, other than the
statement required by section 1333 of this title, shall be required
on any cigarette package.”
The Labeling Act defines a “package” as “a pack, box,
carton, or container of any kind in which cigarettes are offered
for sale, sold, or otherwise distributed to consumers.” A package onsert is “[a] communication affixed to
but separate from an individual cigarette pack and/or carton
purchased at retail by consumers, such as a miniature brochure
included beneath the outer cellophane wrapping or glued to the
outside of the cigarette packaging.”
25 mai 2009
Smokers lawsuit against tobacco companies
The California Supreme Court ruled against the people who smoke last year, saying a federal law on tobacco products advertising and the companies’ First Amendment rights to commercial speech allowed the marketing campaigns.
The federal legislation confirms the authority of the Federal Trade Commission to control deceptive or unfair practices in cigarette advertising.
The smokers sued under a California law that bars unjust competition. The competition is alleged to be unfair in this case because competing tobacco companies that respected state law acted at a disadvantage.
Urging the Supreme Court to turn down the case, the tobacco companies said the federal legislation pre-empted any state law ban on cigarette ads if the ban was based on health and smoking.
In January, the court decided another tobacco case, where smokers in the northeastern state of Maine are suing tobacco companies for alleged deceptive advertising of «light» cigarettes.
05 février 2009
Cigarettes shouldn't be taxed
I just heard that they were going to start charging a $1 tax on cigarettes.
Well that means that the government must make an awful lot of money.
Why don't they just ban buy cigarettes like they do drugs. But of course they don't do a very good job on that either. I don't think they really do a really good job on anything lately.
Why should the government be making money on cigarettes? Just throw them away.