ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Indiana Blogs -> Indiana Civil & Business Lawyer

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Indiana

: Indiana Civil & Business Lawyer

Consumer Safety Database a Problem for Trade Secrets?

ADVERTISEMENTS
Toxic Tort Litigation Blog writes about several problems with the pending database from the Consumer Product Safety Commission. While the post,
CPSC's New Database: An Opportunity for Abuse?, covers a lot of territory, the following points about trade secrets interested me:
The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 ("CPSIA") provides that the Consumer Product Safety Commission ("CPSC") will establish and maintain an Internet database on the safety of consumer products. The CPSIA Section 212 requires that the database be: (1) available to the public; (2) searchable; and (3) accessible on the CPSC's website. Reports of harm caused by consumer products may be reported by consumers; local, state or federal govenment agencies; health care professionals; child service providers; and public safety entities. Ideally, the database will encourage the sharing of information and direct communications among consumers, consumer advocacy groups and state attorneys general, who have been given an important new role under the CPSIA. For the first time, consumers will have direct instant access on the Agency's website to potentially important product safety information.

***

Because the person making the report need not be identified to the manufacturer unless he or she explicitly consents, there may not be much the manufacturer can do, within the 10 day window provided before the report is posted, to determine whether the report is accurate. Certainly, this narrow window does not permit a manufacturer to obtain the product from a consumer, assuming the consumer can be identified, and inspect it. The manufacturer can request that proprietary or trade secret information not be posted on the database, but that request, if granted, will result only in the sensitive information being redacted, not in a delay in posting the report on the database. The statute permits a manufacturer to request that its own comments also be included in the database, but in the absence of a realistic time frame to perform an investigation of the underlying report, what would be an appropriate comment to make? Moreover, the manufacturer may be at a disadvantage if reporters call seeking comment after the consumer's report is posted by the Commission.
While it is not clear what impelled this legislation, I will presume that it may have to do with the rash of bad products from China. If so, I put it down as an another example of how crises make for bad legislation (TARP, anyone?).

Duane Morris has a page devoted to the law here and the Commission has a portal page here.

Full post as published by Indiana Civil & Business Lawyer on January 06, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.002 secs (from cache 10/31/26 06:05:35)