The HSUS Sues Major Fashion Designers and Retailers over Fur False Advertising

Wow - very bold move on their part. Of course I'm all for it!

-----------------------------------

Widespread Mislabeling One More Reason to Go Fur-Free this Holiday Season

WASHINGTON (Nov. 24, 2008) – Today, The Humane Society of the United States filed a lawsuit in D.C. Superior Court against Andrew Marc, Dillard’s, Lord & Taylor, Macy’s, Neiman Marcus and Saks Fifth Avenue – six of the nation’s largest retailers and fashion designers – for engaging in false advertising and mislabeling of fur garments. These deceptive practices mislead consumers into unknowingly purchasing animal fur products and increase consumer confusion over the type and origin of fur that is used on clothing.

“Despite all the designers and retailers that have gone fur-free in recent years, a hardcore group of heartless holdouts continues to peddle raccoon dog coats to unsuspecting consumers,” said Jonathan R. Lovvorn, vice president and chief counsel for animal protection litigation for The HSUS. “These defendants are the worst of the worst, and just don’t seem to care if consumers are buying their products thinking they are ‘faux fur,’ but are actually getting raccoon dog fur from China.”

Over the last three years, The HSUS has identified dozens of falsely advertised or falsely labeled fur garments across the retail industry. Although many of these garments are advertised or labeled as “faux fur,” 70 percent of the garments actually contained fur from the raccoon dog, a member of the canine family native to parts of Asia, that has been documented to be skinned alive in China.

The lawsuit – filed under the D.C. Consumer Protection Procedures Act – alleges that the six companies “misrepresent” the characteristics of the fur-trimmed garments by (1) advertising and labeling products as “faux fur,” when they are, in fact, derived from real animal fur or (2) advertising and labeling products as common raccoon, fox or rabbit fur when they are, in fact, made from the wholly distinct species of raccoon dog – a member of the dog family. The complaint also alleges violations of the federal Fur Products Labeling Act and Federal Trade Commission Act, which also prohibit the false advertising and mislabeling of any fur product.

The suit comes after several attempts by The HSUS to curb the fur industry’s widespread deceptive advertising and labeling. Since 2005, The HSUS has sent dozens of letters to companies informing them of problems and urging corrective action. The HSUS also filed two legal petitions with the Federal Trade Commission – one in March 2007 and the other in April 2008 – seeking enforcement action and criminal and civil penalties against more than 20 companies for violations of the FPLA, including the six defendants named in the consumer protection lawsuit today. These petitions are still pending before the FTC.

To view the entire complaint, learn about raccoon dogs and their mistreatment, and more, visithumanesociety.org/furfree.

Examples of Defendants’ Deceptive Ads and Labels:

• Last month, Andrew Marc advertised a coat as common raccoon fur on its online Web site, but upon purchase, it was discovered that the garment contained two conflicting labels – one identifying the fur trim as “natural raccoon” but the other identifying the fur trim as “real asiatic raccoon” – the federally required name for raccoon dog.
• Last November, Dillard’s advertised and sold a “faux fur” coat on its online Web site, even though the jacket was made from real animal fur. Dillard’s also advertised, labeled and sold a “genuine raccoon” jacket on its online Web site that was, in fact, made from the wholly distinct species of raccoon dog – a member of the canine family.
• Last December, Lord & Taylor sold an Andrew Marc brand jacket labeled as “polyester” fur at its retail store in Kensington, Md. Testing found that this purportedly faux fur garment was actually made from real raccoon dog and rabbit.
• Macy’s – through its retail division Bloomingdale’s – advertised and sold a “faux fur” jacket on its online store in 2007 and again in 2008. However, both of these jackets contained animal fur.
• Neiman Marcus sold a coat on its online Web site last November that although advertised as “faux fur,” was actually made from genuine rabbit fur. Neiman Marcus also sold an Andrew Marc brand jacket labeled as fake “polyester” fur at its retail store in McLean, Va. Testing later found this jacket to be made from real raccoon dog.
• In December 2007, Saks Fifth Avenue advertised and sold a “faux fur” jacket on its online store that was later determined to be made from genuine rabbit fur.

[Guido]

Meh. They were raised to be coats.

People are going to be stupid for all time, so there's guaranteed to be someone lined up to try to fleece them.

When the demand goes away, so will fur.
In the meantime, protest fur by assaulting anyone wearing fur.

I kid. I kid.
Making stupid people aware they've been fleeced sounds like a brilliant idea... now, if there was only a way to force people to pay attention.

[Deff Gordon]

that is a really horrible horrible lawsuit.
talk about what is wrong in this country... that one ranks right up there with the gay dude and eharmony.

[djredeye]

fur is fucking stupid and tacky anyway. i think its disgusting, wannabe elitist, and arrogant.

[Deff Gordon]

Originally Posted by djredeye

fur is fucking stupid and tacky anyway. i think its disgusting, wannabe elitist, and arrogant.

and wearing a shirt with a big D&G isn't?

[Typofile]

I am continually amazed at people's lack of compassion with regards to this issue.

[djredeye]

Originally Posted by Deff Gordon

and wearing a shirt with a big D&G isn't?

no..i didnt kill anything to make my shirt

[Deff Gordon]

i eat meat. love it. not going to stop. bar-b-q fucking rules.
i have leather seats. have a leather coat. if people want to buy fur, then that's their prerogative. there are far greater worldly injustices to worry about than what type of clothes are being sold in a free market society.

[Deff Gordon]

Originally Posted by djredeye

no..i didnt kill anything to make my shirt

yea.. but it still has that "look at me" arrogance... right?

[Pablo Discobar]

Originally Posted by Deff Gordon

and wearing a shirt with a big D&G isn't?

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAA


Touche! Nice one there. ZIIIIIIIIIIING

[djredeye]

Originally Posted by djredeye

fur is fucking stupid and tacky anyway. i think its disgusting, wannabe elitist, and arrogant.

disgusting, because you're wearing a carcas
wannabe elitist, because it really doesnt serve a purpose other than showing off
and arrogant because its just all a part of the belief that just we can just go along with our lives destroying other inhabitants of the planet just because we're the "smarter" species. We're not cavemen, we dont need to wear pelts to survive...other animals are not ours to do whatever we like with especially when the only thing its for is out of vanity.

I don't even buy faux fur, so I'm safe on this one.

[Deff Gordon]

Originally Posted by djredeye

disgusting, because you're wearing a carcas
wannabe elitist, because it really doesnt serve a purpose other than showing off
and arrogant because its just all a part of the belief that just we can just go along with our lives destroying other inhabitants of the planet just because we're the "smarter" species. We're not cavemen, we dont need to wear pelts to survive...other animals are not ours to do whatever we like with especially when the only thing its for is out of vanity.

what about the people that really like how soft the fur is? they love the way it feels. there are those people out there...

and everything you said can be applied to anything. especially a shirt with a D&G logo on it. that's cool that you don't like fur and you won't wear it... but i don't think you guys have the right to say that others can't.

[Typofile]

Originally Posted by Deff Gordon

i eat meat. love it. not going to stop. bar-b-q fucking rules.
i have leather seats. have a leather coat. if people want to buy fur, then that's their prerogative. there are far greater worldly injustices to worry about than what type of clothes are being sold in a free market society.

Like what? Human rights issues?

Unfortunately, people, in general, have no real understanding of the power of their choices. The problems associated with the clothing industry don't stop at animal rights issues, there are very real human injustices included as well.

[djredeye]

Originally Posted by Deff Gordon

yea.. but it still has that "look at me" arrogance... right?

i really cant help it if the designer puts a cool design on a tshirt...ive got tons of other clothes that dont have the designers name splashed on the front. i could give a shit if anyone knows what im wearing...and actually i have NOT bought things because some designers name is prominently placed on it. But if it happens to be a cool design them so be it...but whatever it is..nothings been clubbed over the head so that i could wear it. so......