Summary

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Federal Trade Commission v. Standard Education Soc…

It was clearly the practice of respondents through their agents, in accordance with a well matured plan, to mislead customers into the belief that they were given an encyclopedia, and that they paid only for the loose leaf supplement. That representations were made justifying this belief; that the plan was outlined in letters going directly from the companies; that men and women were deceived by them-there can be little doubt. Certainly the Commission was justified from the evidence in finding that customers were misled.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Federal Trade Commission v. Standard Education Soc…

The practice of promising free books where no free books were intended to be given, and the practice of deceiving unwary purchasers into the false belief that loose leaf supplements alone sell for $69.50, when in reality both books and supplement regularly sell for $69.50, are practices contrary to decent business standards. To fail to prohibit such evil practices would be to elevate deception in business and to give to it the standing and dignity of truth.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black Federal Trade Commission v. Standard Education Soc…

In reaching the conclusion that respondents should be left free to engage in that part of the sales scheme prohibited by clauses 1 and 3 of the Commission's order, the court below (86 F. (2d) 692, 695) reasoned as follows: 'We cannot take too seriously the suggestion that a man who is buying a set of books and a ten years' 'extension service' will be fatuous enough to be misled by the mere statement that the first are given away, and that he is paying only for the second.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature