NAB reports (Jan-Dec 1941)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

FEDERAL TRADE COMMiSSION ACTION COMPLAINTS Federal Trade Commission has alleged unfair com¬ petition against the following firms. The respondents will be given an opportunity to show cause why cease and desist orders should not be issued against them. such merchandise, shipped to purchasers by the factories which manufacture it on the respondent’s order, bears the iabeis and shipping tags of the Lincoln Chair & Novelty Co. and is shipped upon the respondent’s bill of lading. Trade magazine advertisements of the respondent’s merchandise, according to the complaint, contain a list of “factories” purportedly located at Gardner, Mass., Jamestown, N. Y., Richmond, Ind., and Springfield, Mo., with “executive offices” at 146 West 46th St., New York. The complaint alleges that the respondent’s representations are misleading and untrue in that the Lincoln Chair & Novelty Co, does not make the merchandise advertised; neither does the re¬ spondent own or control any furniture factories where such mer¬ chandise is made, nor are there any furniture factories maintaining their executive offices at the respondent’s New York business address. (444S) Fretted Instrument Mannfaetiiring Corporation; United Guitar Corporation; John Garner, individually and as an officer of each corporation; Morris Brooks, individually and as an officer of Fretted Instrument Manufacturing Corporation; and Frank Solvino and F'rank Masiello, individually and as officers of United Guitar Corporation, all of 45 Corneilson Ave., Jersey City, N. J., engaged in the manufacture and sale of various kinds of musical instruments including guitars and mandolins, are charged, in a complaint, w'ith unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce. The complaint charges that since 1928 various concerns in the F’nited States have manufactured certain stringed instruments, such as guitars and mandolins, containing a resonating or amplifying device consisting of a delicate metal cone capped by a wooden bridge over which the strings are drawn. Stringed instruments equipped with this device produce, when played, a quality of tone alleged to be different from, more resonant than, and far superior to that produced by stringed instruments not so equipped. A perforated cover plate is affixed to the top of the body portion of the instrument as a protection for the resonating or amplifying device. The complaint charges that w'ith a view to capitalizing upon the acknowledged superior quality and excellent reputation of stringed instruments so equipped, the respondents proceeded to manufacture, sell and place in the hands of various retail dealers for resale, mandolins and guitars which simulate in appearance but do not actually possess the superior resonating or amplifying device. In soliciting the sale of such products, the complaint continues, the respondents have caused advertisements to be placed in music magazines having a wide circulation in the various States, and that typical of such representations made by the respondents is: “$9.90 List GUITAR OR MANDOLIN DISC TOP MARVELOUS TONE” The complaint charges that through the use of the perforated disc or plate in the manner described and by constructing and finishing the interior of their instruments so as to have them simulate instruments equipped with the amplifying or resonating device, the respondents have represented directly or through im¬ plication to members of the purchasing public that their instru¬ ments are equipped w'ith a resonating or amplifying device, when such is not the fact, and that by use of said perforated disc or plate in the manner aforesaid, the respondents have placed in the hands of unscrupulous dealers a means by which innocent pur¬ chasers may be led to believe they are acquiring an instrument equipped with a resonating or amplifying device, when such is not the fact. In fact, the complaint charges, the stringed instruments manu¬ factured and sold by the respondents arc not and have not been equipped with an amplifying or resonating device, nor is such device i)art of their standard equipment. (4444) Lincoln Chair & Novelly Company — .Vlleging unfair and de¬ ceptive practices in the sale of wooden furniture and allied items in violation of the F'cderal Trade Commission Act, a complaint has been issued against A. M. Druckman, trading as Lincoln Chair & Novelty Co., 146 West 46th St., New' York. The complaint alleges that the respondent, a furniture distrilnitor, offers and sells to retail dealers, furniture mafle in factories which he does not own, control or oDerate; that in arlvertising matter circulated in commerce he offers such merchandise under the name of the Lincoln Chair & Novelty Co. as the maker, and that 56 — ■ January 17, 1941 CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS Commission has issued the following cease and desist orders: IMeiidoza Fur Dyeing Works, Inc., 722 East 133rd St., New 'York, engaged in the dyeing of furs for fur coats and clothing, has been ordered to cease and desist from certain misrepresenta¬ tions. The Commission finds that in the course of its business and for the purpose of inducing customers to forward pelts for dyeing and processing, the respondent furnishes to some customers various sketches or designs for use in the manufacture of fur garments, and also labels to be attached to such garments designating them as “Mendoza Furs.” The respondent further advertised, the Commission finds, in vari¬ ous circulars, newspapers and periodicals, that the sketches supplied by it are adaptations of designs by famous Parisian couturiers. The respondent also represented that furs processed by it have won a prize or award in a competitive competition in Paris, France. These various advertisements carry reproductions of the various labels which the respondent allegedly furnished and which purport to be labels of Parisian couturiers such as Schiaparelli. Vionnet, Heim, Max and Jeanne Lavin, and others. In truth, the Commission finds, the sketches and designs fur¬ nished by the respondent were not prepared by any Parisian cou¬ turiers, and the garments to which such labels are attached w'ere not manufactured in Paris. France, and no garment of the respond¬ ent ever w'on a prize or aw'ard in a competition with garments of others in Paris, France, except that the respondent, in 1928, was awarded Grand Prix. a gold medal and diploma by the “Exposition d’Economie Domestique”, held at Paris, France, “for its excellent process of the imitation of skins of beaver, fox” and other furs. The respondent is ordered to cease and desist from representing, through use of their names on labels, or in any other manner, that garments made of furs processed by the respondent are made or de¬ signed by Schiaparelli, Vdonnet, Heim, Max or Jeanne Lavin, or any other couturier, when such is not the fact ; using the names of well-known designers of w'omcn’s clothing on labels or in any other manner to designate, describe or refer to garments not in fact de¬ signed by the person or persons w'hose names are used; representing that sketches or designs furnished by the respondent to its customers are sketches or designs prepared by Parisian couturiers, and that the labels supplied with such sketches or designs are the labels sup¬ plied by such couturiers for use in garments made from such sketches or designs, and that respondent is authorized to use their names in connection with the manufacture and sale of fur garments; and from using the term “Grand Prix Paris” or other words of similar meaning to describe or refer to a prize received bv the re¬ spondent from “Exposition d’Economie Domestique” in 1928, unless accompanied by a statement equally conspicuous, show'ing the nature of the award or prize with the date thereof. (3824) Froisto File ('orporation, 349 Broadway, New York, engaged in the manufacture, sale and distribution of steel card cabinets, has been ordered to cease and desist from certain unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in com¬ merce. The Commission fimls that (he resriondenl, in selling its cabinets, has caused to he published and distributed to its dealer purchasers and prospective purchasers located in the various States, certain