[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 139 (Thursday, July 20, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37334-37335]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-17878]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 236
Guide for Avoiding Deceptive Use of Word ``Mill'' in the Textile
Industry
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.
ACTION: Rescission of the guide for avoiding deceptive use of word
``Mill'' in the textile industry.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (the ``Commission''), as part of
its periodic review of all its guides and rules, announces that it has
concluded a review of its Guide for Avoiding Deceptive Use of Word
``Mill'' in the Textile Industry (``Guide'' or ``Use of Word `Mill'
Guide''). The Commission has decided to rescind the Guide.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ann M. Guler, Investigator, Federal Trade Commission, Los Angeles
Regional Office, 11000 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 13209, Los Angeles, CA
90024, (310) 235-7890.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Use of Word `Mill' Guide was issued by the Commission in
1967.\1\ The Guide states that the word ``mill'' should not be used in
the corporate, business, or trade name of any person or concern
handling textiles, unless the person or concern actually owns and
operates or controls the manufacturing facility in which all textile
materials sold under that name are produced. The Guide includes
examples where use of the word ``mill'' has been found to be deceptive.
\1\ Industry guides are administrative interpretations of laws
administered by the Commission for the guidance of the public in
conducting its affairs in conformity with legal requirements. 16 CFR
1.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 15, 1994, the Commission published a Notice in the Federal
Register soliciting comment on the Guide.\2\ Specifically, the
Commission solicited comments on the costs and benefits of the Guide
and its regulatory and economic effect. The comment period closed June
14, 1994. The Commission received three comments in response to the
Notice. They are discussed in Part II below.
\2\ 59 FR 18005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Comments Received
The Commission received comments from three organizations: The
American Textile Manufacturers Institute (ATMI), National Association
of Hosiery Manufacturers (NAHM), and the Better Business Bureau of
Nashville/Middle Tennessee, Inc. All of the commenters supported the
continuation of the Guide in its present form. The ATMI and NAHM both
stated that the Guide is beneficial to the textile manufacturing
industry and to consumers because it prevents possible false claims by
companies that may distribute but do not actually manufacture textile
products. They further stated that the guide does not impose costs or
burdens on industry or on consumers. The Better Business Bureau of
Nashville/Middle Tennessee, Inc.'s comment asserted that the Guide is
necessary ``to prevent misleading the public and unfair competition in
the marketplace.''
The Nashville/Middle Tennessee BBB comment also raised the issue of
other words used in trade names. The BBB recommended that the
Commission restrict the use of words such as ``factory'' and
``manufacturer'' in corporate, business, or trade names ``unless the
entity so named actually owns, operates or controls the manufacturing
facility which produces all merchandise being advertised and/or sold
under the name.''
III. Conclusion
The Commission has concluded its regulatory review of the Guide for
Avoiding Deceptive Use of the Word ``Mill'' by rescinding the Guide.
The Commission has no evidence of circumstances associated with the use
of the word ``mill'' that would require special protection for
consumers or guidance for industry, such as evidence that consumers
currently believe that textile industry entities with the word ``mill''
in their names are engaged in the manufacture of textiles. Today, the
word ``mill'' is commonly used in business names both within and
outside the textile industry. For example, many shopping malls use the
word ``mill'' or ``mills'' in their names. The word ``mill'' is also
frequently used in the names of businesses, including retail stores or
shopping malls, that occupy the building or site of a former textile
mill. Additionally, the word ``mill'' is used in various enterprises
outside of the textile
[[Page 37335]]
industry. For example, firms in the food production or food service
industry may use the word ``mill'' because of its association with
grinding grain into flour. These uses would not be covered by the
Guide, because the businesses do not handle textiles. Other businesses
may use the word ``mill'' in a creative name that has nothing to do
with the original meanings of the word for textile manufacturing, grain
processing, or any other form of materials processing. The Commission
considers it unlikely that such uses of the word ``mill'' mislead
consumers in any material way in their purchasing decisions or
otherwise cause any consumer injury.
Given the many and varied uses of the term ``mill'' in today's
lexicon, the Commission has concluded that the Guide is obsolete. If,
in the future, certain uses of this term (or any other term) in
business or trade names are determined to be materially misleading, the
Commission can address such practices under Section 5 of the Federal
Trade Commission Act.
List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 236
Advertising, trade name, textiles, mill.
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-17878 Filed 7-19-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M
