FTC to Kill Amplifier Rule: Help us Protect it by Feb 16th, 2021!

[jbiz42]

From the FTC commissioner:

https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/1585038/p974222amplifierrulewilsonstatement.pdf

"The Amplifier Rule was created in the 1970s, an era during which the FTC engaged in prolific rulemaking. During one 15-month period, the Commission issued a rule a month. No area of commerce was too straightforward to escape the Commission’s notice.

The Sleeping Bag Rule and the Tablecloth Rule specified the “cut size” of fabric to be “accompanied by a clear and conspicuous disclosure of the dimensions of the finished products and an explanation that those dimensions constituted the finished size.”

The Guides for Labeling, Advertising and Sale of Wigs and Other Hairpieces addressed representations and disclosures in the advertising and labeling of hairpieces for women and men, including wigs, falls, chignons and toupees. These Guides included detailed disclosure requirements related to hair composition, including instructions for determining the composition of the product (“the ratio of the weight of each type of hair fiber to the total weight of hair fiber in the product”).

The Trade Regulation Rule concerning the Failure to Disclose the Lethal Effects of Inhaling Quick-Freeze Aerosol Spray Products Used for Frosting Cocktail Glasses, known colloquially as the Quick-Freeze Spray Rule, required a clear and conspicuous warning on aerosol spray products used for frosted beverage glasses."

"With respect to the Amplifier Rule, there have been many technological advances in the amplifier industry since this Rule was promulgated. Although the FTC has updated and no doubt can continue to update the rule, I question whether the FTC’s continued engagement in this space is constructive. Does it remain helpful for the FTC to specify the precise testing conditions manufacturers must use, and how they must communicate power output?9 Are there standard setting organizations better suited to this task? In other industries, the FTC has repealed Rules when it determined the agency’s guidance was no longer necessary. For example, the FTC repealed the Picture Tube Rule because the Commission determined it was no longer necessary to prevent deceptive claims regarding the size of television screens or to encourage uniformity and accuracy in their marketing. Could the same be true here? Freeing businesses from unnecessarily prescriptive requirements benefits consumers."

 

[highfigh]

Why do you think there are drive-by shootings? Look up the history of prohibition; it doesn't work. That's not even debated.

Prohibition by its very nature tends to concentrate the potency of the good being prohibited (due to risk in distribution/storage/transportation). Thus moonshine during the original prohibition, and heroin, crack, fentanyl, etc. during the current prohibition.

And it doesn't prevent the sale of prohibited products, just moves them to a black market, which is more dangerous. Or have you not heard of the infamous "white van" loudspeakers?

No, fraud is not violence (because there is consent in both parties). But it can be sued for, and otherwise addressed.

Requirements from engineers is great; requirement from bureaucrats is not. The FTC regulations seem more like the latter than the former.

Drive by shootings occur because some people are idiots and A-Holes. They don't care that something is illegal, they're damned if they'll let someone tell them what to do or what they can't do.

White van speakers is a scam and if they were widely marketed, they would fall under the FTC guidelines IF the FTC had set the specs for speaker measurement. If they were selling crap receivers and amplifiers, they WOULD need to use them, or be the subject in lawsuits & possibly criminal actions because they represent their products as something they aren't. THAT's fraud and it can be prosecuted.

What if the Government based their requirements on good technical info? FTC has gotten a lot of input from people who have the technical background and this is a good time for that to happen again.

 

[Pogre]

Right. I think most of us here would like not so much to only continue an outdated guideline, and in fact offered suggestions to update.

I'm surprised @gene or a Mod hasn't stepped in to put a stop to all of the Political nutjobs that are gaslighting Genes thread into the dirt.

Oh, I dunno... some silly assertions and leaps in logic have been made but so far it's been pretty civil and more or less on topic.

 

[jbiz42]

Drive by shootings occur because some people are idiots and A-Holes. They don't care that something is illegal, they're damned if they'll let someone tell them what to do or what they can't do.

White van speakers is a scam and if they were widely marketed, they would fall under the FTC guidelines IF the FTC had set the specs for speaker measurement. If they were selling crap receivers and amplifiers, they WOULD need to use them, or be the subject in lawsuits & possibly criminal actions because they represent their products as something they aren't. THAT's fraud and it can be prosecuted.

What if the Government based their requirements on good technical info? FTC has gotten a lot of input from people who have the technical background and this is a good time for that to happen again.

Except that once alcohol prohibition ended, the violence ended also. Before the drug war, there was much less violence in that market as well. The violence is inherently tied to the prohibition.

It would be best to avoid the potential for violence (as well as extortion).

White van speakers are black market, and so exist regardless of regulation.

The FTC commish has stated that it is not likely that the regulations would be updated in a timely fashion. A single set of rules don't apply for all cases, anyway. Why not allow different people, applications, and markets decide what standards work best for them? Why does the assumption persist that there can only be one set of rules for ~330 million people in many different states?

 

[highfigh]

Except that once alcohol prohibition ended, the violence ended also. Before the drug war, there was much less violence in that market as well. The violence is inherently tied to the prohibition.

It would be best to avoid the potential for violence (as well as extortion).

White van speakers are black market, and so exist regardless of regulation.

The FTC commish has stated that it is not likely that the regulations would be updated in a timely fashion. A single set of rules don't apply for all cases, anyway. Why not allow different people, applications, and markets decide what standards work best for them? Why does the assumption persist that there can only be one set of rules for ~330 million people in many different states?

Violent crime has decreased over the last 25 years- should we just continue to think it's worse, just because the media says it is without looking at the facts?

THE FTC RULES DON'T GOVERN PEOPLE, THEY GOVERN PRODUCTS! They don't tell anyone what to buy, they tell manufacturers how to state the specs. If someone wants to buy some POS that doesn't perform, that's their problem.

 

[Pogre]

Except that once alcohol prohibition ended, the violence ended also. Before the drug war, there was much less violence in that market as well. The violence is inherently tied to the prohibition.

It would be best to avoid the potential for violence (as well as extortion).

White van speakers are black market, and so exist regardless of regulation.

The FTC commish has stated that it is not likely that the regulations would be updated in a timely fashion. A single set of rules don't apply for all cases, anyway. Why not allow different people, applications, and markets decide what standards work best for them? Why does the assumption persist that there can only be one set of rules for ~330 million people in many different states?

Why not require manufacturers to state their specs honestly and let the consumer decide for themselves?

 

[Pogre]

I don't know why you keep conflating prohibition with requiring manufacturers to claim actual honest specs for a product. One has nothing to do with the other...

(strawman)

 

[highfigh]

Why not require manufacturers to state their specs honestly and let the consumer decide for themselves?

You mean, something similar to the old method from '74? What is an "honest" spec? Something that meets the requirements of the FTC's guidelines? The manufacturers still came up with something that made them different, like Sansui did when they started showing Slew Rate.

Since the power supply determines a lot of the performance limits, let's make 'All channels driven, 20-20KHz, <.xxx% THD, ± .1dB @4 Ohms and 8 Ohms' the requirement. If an AVR or other amp can make a good showing with that, it might be a good candidate unless they prove to be unreliable. The ones that show the largest power increase with 4 Ohms will likely be good choices. It would have to be better than bickering about power from 20-20KHz vs showing power @1KHz and sellers like Beast Buy bullshytting people with their "XXX Watts" claims.

 

[Pogre]

You mean, something similar to the old method from '74? What is an "honest" spec? Something that meets the requirements of the FTC's guidelines? The manufacturers still came up with something that made them different, like Sansui did when they started showing Slew Rate.

Since the power supply determines a lot of the performance limits, let's make 'All channels driven, 20-20KHz, .xxx% THD, ± .1dB @4 Ohms and 8 Ohms" a requirement. If an AVR or other amp can make a good showing with that, it might be a good candidate. The ones that show the largest power increase with 4 Ohms will likely be good choices.

Well yeah, that's what I mean. Set a standard then require honesty in specmanship. I'm all for it.

 

[highfigh]

Well yeah, that's what I mean. Set a standard then require honesty in specmanship. I'm all for it.

The amount of confusion that has been created by badly stated specs is incredible- I have had to explain it so many times, it's hard to describe the annoyance. The ones who ask aren't technically-minded, so they don't understand why a larger number isn't always better.

 

[Pogre]

The amount of confusion that has been created by badly stated specs is incredible- I have had to explain it so many times, it's hard to describe the annoyance. The ones who ask aren't technically-minded, so they don't understand why a larger number isn't always better.

Oh I agree. I see it all the time. I understand what you were getting at. There are ways to "honestly" state specs to make them look a lot more impressive than they really are. That's where the standardization comes in and why I think it protects consumers.

 

[3db]

Oh I agree. I see it all the time. I understand what you were getting at. There are ways to "honestly" state specs to make them look a lot more impressive than they really are. That's where the standardization comes in and why I think it protects consumers.

Yes but we can't have a federal organization setting such standards for fear of escalation to violence due to differences of opinions. (Disclaimer.. Not directed towards you Pogre..just in case my sarcasm is misread)

 

[jbiz42]

Drive by shootings occur because some people are idiots and A-Holes. They don't care that something is illegal, they're damned if they'll let someone tell them what to do or what they can't do.

White van speakers is a scam and if they were widely marketed, they would fall under the FTC guidelines IF the FTC had set the specs for speaker measurement. If they were selling crap receivers and amplifiers, they WOULD need to use them, or be the subject in lawsuits & possibly criminal actions because they represent their products as something they aren't. THAT's fraud and it can be prosecuted.

What if the Government based their requirements on good technical info? FTC has gotten a lot of input from people who have the technical background and this is a good time for that to happen again.

Except that once alcohol prohibition ended, the violence ended also. Before the drug war, there was much less violence in that market as well. The violence is inherently tied to the prohibition.

It would be best to avoid the potential for violence (as well as extortion).

White van speakers are black market, and so exist regardless of regulation.

The FTC commish has stated that it is not likely that the regulations would be updated in a timely fashion. A single set of rules don't apply for all cases, anyway. Why not allow different people, applications, and markets decide what standards work best for them? Why does the assumption persist that there can only be one set of rules for ~330 million people in many different states?

I don't know why you keep conflating prohibition with requiring manufacturers to claim actual honest specs for a product. One has nothing to do with the other...

(strawman)

I don't know why you keep conflating prohibition with requiring manufacturers to claim actual honest specs for a product. One has nothing to do with the other...

(strawman)

Yeah, that was just because somebody was praising the drug war. Related, but not the same.

 

[jbiz42]

Why not require manufacturers to state their specs honestly and let the consumer decide for themselves?

The issue is, who gets to decide what is the right way to state specifications. Better to be groups of engineers motivated to improve, maybe innovate different test methods for different applications, than unelected bureaucrats with guaranteed budgets.

The FTC essentially admitted this anyway, so I don't understand folks trying to get them to do something they don't think they do well!

 

[jbiz42]

Yes but we can't have a federal organization setting such standards for fear of escalation to violence due to differences of opinions. (Disclaimer.. Not directed towards you Pogre..just in case my sarcasm is misread)

Yeah, authoritarianism is so great.

Ignores many other reason; why the federal government (who themselves admit they shouldn't do it)?

Do you think all engineering standards should be owned by the government? IEEE, AES, all of it?

 

[trochetier]

The debate is inherent in the discussion about whether regulation should be maintained or not. The decades-obsolete state of at least a couple of the rules show the danger of leaving regulation to an uncompetitive monopoly. Standards are handled better by non-governmental entities (e.g. IEEE 802.11).

Perhaps the more philosophical threads should be moved elsewhere. But unfortunately there hasn't been much discussion on the technical merits (or lack thereof) of the rules, which I've brought up several times. People keep trying to defend the system that results the in obsolete rules in the first place.

The irony is that the FTC itself believes that standards organizations are better suited to manage this: https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/1585038/p974222amplifierrulewilsonstatement.pdf

So if you support the FTC, why wouldn't you believe them when they admit they probably shouldn't have a hand in this??

Standards organizations like IEEE, SAE are voluntary don't have the authority to require compliance, that's the role of regulations and the govt. Even NIST the premier government standards organization cannot enforce standards. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institute_of_Standards_and_Technology

 

[3db]

Standards organizations like IEEE, SAE are voluntary don't have the authority to require compliance, that's the role of regulations and the govt. Even NIST the premier government standards organization cannot enforce standards. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institute_of_Standards_and_Technology

Agreed but our friend cant make that connection. It leads to violence.

 

[Gmoney]

Right. I think most of us here would like not so much to only continue an outdated guideline, and in fact offered suggestions to update.

Oh, I dunno... some silly assertions and leaps in logic have been made but so far it's been pretty civil and more or less on topic.

Apparently the FTC hasn't been doing their job I have seen with my own eyes audio manufactures listing on their product boxes 1150 x 5 watts total power that was at a Bestbuy store I was in about a year ago. Both Sony and Onkyo AVR's. Now that may fall under false advertisement, with the internet we have now buying online instead of buying from a brick and mortar store an implied warranty crossing State lines can become a consumers financial nightmare. One would have to file a lawsuit in the State that the product was shipped from plus against the manufacturer and where are they? overseas. I never buy from say Bestbuy store they only have a 14 day return window. After that you deal with the manufactures for your implied warranty. I have gotten burnt many times with audio and video products. Just recently by Vizio so yeah has the FTC been doing their job? I would say not.

 

[cpp]

https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement

IT appears they start with warning letters and if that doesn't work, its off to court.

Some cases: https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings

 

[Gmoney]

https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement

IT appears they start with warning letters and if that doesn't work, its off to court.

Some cases: https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings

I found only one Onkyo, that the FTC filed against that was back in 96