[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 18, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34626-34630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-13656]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

16 CFR Part 24


Guides for Select Leather and Imitation Leather Products

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Confirmation of guides.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (``FTC'' or ``Commission'') has 
completed the regulatory review of its Guides for Select Leather and 
Imitation Leather Products (``Leather Guides'' or ``Guides'') as part 
of its systematic review of all current Commission regulations and 
guides, and has decided to retain the Guides in their current form.

DATES: This action is effective as of June 18, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of this notice should be sent to the 
Consumer Response Center, Room 130, Federal Trade Commission, 600 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20580. The notice also is 
available on the Internet at the Commission's Web site, http://www.ftc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan E. Arthur, Attorney, Southwest 
Region, Federal Trade Commission, 1999 Bryan Street, Suite 2150, 
Dallas, Texas 75201. E-mail: [email protected], telephone: (214) 979-
9370.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction

    The Commission has determined, as part of its oversight 
responsibilities, to review all Commission rules and guides 
periodically. These reviews seek information about the costs and 
benefits of the Commission's rules and guides and their regulatory and 
economic impact. The information obtained during the reviews assists 
the Commission in determining whether rules and guides should be 
confirmed, amended, or rescinded.

II. Background

    The Commission's Leather Guides address misrepresentations 
regarding the composition and characteristics of specific leather and 
imitation leather products.\1\ The Guides apply to the manufacture, 
sale, distribution, marketing, or advertising of leather or simulated 
leather purses, luggage, wallets, footwear, and other similar products. 
Importantly, the Guides state that disclosure of non-leather content 
should be made for material which has the appearance of leather but is 
not leather.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Leather 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. 
They provide the basis for voluntary and simultaneous abandonment of 
unlawful practices by members of industry.'' 16 C.F.R. 1.5. Conduct 
inconsistent with the Guides may result in corrective action by the 
Commission under applicable statutory provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission adopted the Leather Guides in 1996, as part of its 
periodic review of its rules and guides.\2\ The

[[Page 34627]]

Leather Guides consolidated portions of the Guides for the Luggage and 
Related Products Industry (``Luggage Guides''), the Guides for Shoe 
Content Labeling and Advertising (``Shoe Guides''), and the Guides for 
the Ladies' Handbag Industry (``Handbag Guides'').\3\ The Leather 
Guides also include provisions previously contained in the Commission's 
Trade Regulation Rule Concerning Misbranding and Deception as to 
Leather Content of Waist Belts (``Waist Belt Rule'').\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 61 Fed. Reg. 51577 (October 3, 1996).
    \3\ The Luggage Guides, the Shoe Guides, and the Handbag Guides 
were repealed in 1995. 60 Fed. Reg. 48027 (September 18, 1995). On 
the same day, the Commission requested public comment regarding 
proposed Leather Guides. 60 Fed. Reg. 48056 (September 18, 1995).
    \4\ The Commission repealed the Waist Belt Rule earlier in 1996. 
61 Fed. Reg. 25560 (May 22, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The language of the Luggage Guides, the Shoe Guides, the Handbag 
Guides, and the Waist Belt Rule was updated and clarified in the 
Leather Guides, and unnecessary provisions were deleted. Further, the 
Leather Guides modified a number of provisions from the older guides 
and rule. Among these modifications were an expansion of the scope of 
the Guides to include misrepresentations in marketing and advertising, 
the removal of the limitation that only top grain leather should be 
called ``leather'' without qualification, and the addition of a 
provision regarding the disclosure of the percentage of non-leather and 
leather material contained in bonded leather.
    On May 23, 2007, the Commission published a Federal Register notice 
(``FRN'') seeking public comment on the Leather Guides.\5\ The FRN 
sought comment concerning the continuing need for the Leather Guides; 
industry adoption of the Guides; costs and benefits of the Guides; 
effects of the modifications to the provisions previously contained in 
the Luggage Guides, the Shoe Guides, the Handbag Guides, and the Waist 
Belt Rule; any changes that should be made to the Guides; conflicts or 
overlap between the Guides and other laws or regulations; changes in 
consumer perceptions and preferences; and the effect that changes in 
technology, economic conditions, or environmental conditions have had 
on the Guides.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 72 Fed. Reg. 28906 (May 23, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Regulatory Review Comments

    The Commission received four comments in response to the FRN.\6\ 
The comments were submitted by the Footwear Distributors and Retailers 
of America (``FDRA''), an association of retailers, distributors, 
importers, and manufacturers of footwear; the Leather Industries of 
America (``LIA''), which represents a number of companies engaged in 
the tanning and/or marketing of leather and related companies; the 
Sponge and Chamois Institute (``SCI''), an organization comprised of 
producers and distributors of sponges and chamois products in the 
United States; and Design Resources, Inc. (``DRI''), a company engaged 
in the leather products business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The comments are cited in this notice by the name of the 
commenter. All comments are on the public record and available for 
public inspection in the Consumer Response Center, Room 130, Federal 
Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20580, 
from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. The comments are also available on the Internet at the 
Commission's Web site, http://www.ftc.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Comments Concerning the Usefulness of the Guides

    Three of the comments support continuing the Guides, and the other 
commenter asks that its products be removed from the coverage of the 
Guides. LIA comments that the FTC should retain the Guides and expand 
them in a number of respects.\7\ DRI also supports continuation of the 
Guides.\8\ SCI's request that the Guides be expanded to include chamois 
indicates support for continuation of the Guides.\9\ FDRA requests that 
the Commission abandon the Guides as they relate to footwear, but does 
not comment on the general need for the Guides in other industries.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ LIA at 5.
    \8\ DRI at 1, 2, 6, and 11.
    \9\ SCI at 1 and 5.
    \10\ FDRA at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addressing industry adoption of the Guides, LIA comments that it 
is frequently asked to help members apply the Guides to consumer 
products.\11\ DRI says that the industry follows and embraces the 
Guides and their current labeling disclosure requirements,\12\ and that 
companies ``rely on the Guides and factor them into their investment 
and critical business decisions regarding product development.'' \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ LIA at 5.
    \12\ DRI at 2.
    \13\ Id. at 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Two comments address the Guides' benefits to consumers. DRI states 
that the Guides have a theme of avoiding deception.\14\ In LIA's 
comment, the association says the Guides have ``fundamental 
importance'' as a reference point for consumers.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id. at 10.
    \15\ LIA at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the FRN questions regarding costs and benefits of 
the Guides for businesses, LIA comments that ``the Guides provide a 
framework for communicating truthful and non-misleading messages to 
consumers'' concerning industry products,\16\ inhibit advertisers from 
making deceptive claims, promote honest business practices, and have 
``fundamental importance'' as a reference point for U.S. 
businesses.\17\ LIA states that several specific provisions are helpful 
to industry because they encourage companies to communicate information 
that consumers may not be able to determine on their own prior to 
purchase.\18\ DRI also addressed this issue, saying that the Guides 
provide voluntary guidelines for the marketing and sale of leather and 
imitation leather products to members of the leather industry that are 
promoting truthful, non-misleading advertising to consumers.\19\ 
Additionally, DRI explains that leather businesses look to the Guides 
to understand their disclosure obligations for labels, tags, and 
advertising, and to ensure that they accurately represent their 
products to consumers.\20\ With regard to bonded leather and 
composition disclosures, DRI's comment says that the Guides help 
businesses understand their disclosure obligations and avoid consumer 
deception and confusion.\21\ According to DRI, with regard to bonded 
leather, the Guides ``have worked well for the past ten years and 
continue to do so.''\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Id. at 2.
    \17\ Id. at 5.
    \18\ Id. at 5-6.
    \19\ DRI at 1.
    \20\ Id. at 11.
    \21\ Id. at 1.
    \22\ Id. at 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Suggested Changes to the Guides

    LIA suggests that the Commission make numerous changes to the 
Guides. LIA says that the Guides ``require expansion to make them more 
comprehensive and consistent with global industry practice.''\23\ LIA 
comments that the absence of the information incorporated in its 
suggested modifications will facilitate ``an escalating trend of 
deceptive practice'' within the United States.\24\ SCI's sole 
recommendation is that the Commission add one definition to the 
Guides.\25\ The comment from DRI primarily relates to one of the 
changes proposed by LIA and urges the Commission to refuse to make that 
requested change.\26\ FDRA asks that the

[[Page 34628]]

Guides be abandoned as they related to footwear.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ LIA at 6.
    \24\ Id. at 6-7.
    \25\ SCI at 1 and 5.
    \26\ DRI at 1-12.
    \27\ FDRA at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Suggested Definitions and Disclosures
    LIA proposes adding definitions for the following terms to the 
Guides: (1) top grain or full grain leather, (2) corrected grain 
leather, (3) semi-aniline leather, (4) leather, (5) coated leather, (6) 
laminated leather, (7) split leather, (8) leatherette, (9) bonded 
leather, and (10) chamois.\28\ SCI asks that the Commission add a 
definition of the term ``chamois.''\29\ DRI's comment primarily 
concerns its opposition to LIA's proposed definition of the term 
``bonded leather,''\30\ but DRI also states that LIA is asking the FTC 
to make the Guides ``even more complex by adopting a number of 
complicated definitions that are shrouded in industry jargon and 
terminology.''\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ LIA at 3-4 and 7-21.
    \29\ SCI at 1.
    \30\ DRI at 1.
    \31\ Id. at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The definitions that LIA suggests for the terms ``top grain'' or 
``full grain'' leather, ``corrected grain'' leather, ``split leather,'' 
and ``semi-aniline'' leather are based on the presence or absence of 
grain surface and the finishes used on the material. These definitions 
are not needed, as the Guides apply to all types of leather, as well as 
non-leather material with the appearance of leather. Further, the 
record contains no evidence regarding consumer understanding of these 
terms, several of which may be unfamiliar to many consumers. Absent 
evidence as to how consumers would understand these suggested terms, it 
is difficult to determine whether adoption of the definitions would 
assist or hinder consumers. For these reasons, the Commission is not 
adding these suggested definitions. However, if industry members desire 
to label their products with these terms, they may do so provided that 
the terms used are truthful and non-deceptive.
    LIA also recommends that the Commission modify the Guides to 
include a lengthy definition of the term ``leather.''\32\ Like the 
proposed definitions discussed above, there are portions of this 
definition that are not needed because of the Guides' broad coverage of 
all types of leather, as well as non-leather material with the 
appearance of leather. A portion of the suggested definition dealing 
with disintegrated hide or skin is not needed because Section 24.2(f) 
of the Guides already provides guidance relating to ground leather and 
similar materials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ LIA at 3 and 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also included within LIA's proposed definition of the term 
``leather'' is a provision that would allow use of the term without 
qualification for leather with a finish if the thickness of the finish 
is 0.15 mm or less. According to LIA, a ``finish comprising a pigmented 
polyurethane, acrylic resin, or other polymer-based paint protects the 
grain surface of most types of leather.''\33\ LIA further explains that 
the thickness of the finish depends upon the desired aesthetics and 
intended use of the leather. The comment describes the differences in 
performance and quality of material with various thicknesses of 
coatings, cites the British Standards Institution as support for LIA's 
position, and states that the threshold is commonly understood by most 
leather producers.\34\ However, the record developed during this review 
contains no information regarding whether, or to what extent, consumers 
expect that coatings have been applied to products labeled as 
``leather'' without qualification. Without such information, it is 
difficult to determine whether adoption of the proposed definition 
would result in consumer deception or confusion. Therefore, the 
Commission is not adopting the provision proposed by LIA. For similar 
reasons, the Commission is not adding LIA's proposed definitions of 
``coated leather'' and ``laminated leather'' to the Guides, nor are 
those terms being added as examples of appropriate disclosures in 
Section 24.2(e) of the Guides (dealing with misrepresentations that a 
product is wholly of a particular composition) as recommended by LIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ Id. at 10.
    \34\ Id. at 10-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    LIA also recommends that the Commission add a definition of the 
term ``leatherette'' to refer to material made of paper, cloth, or 
synthetic material and finished to simulate the appearance of 
leather.\35\ Further, LIA asks that the Commission add the term 
``leatherette (not leather)'' to Section 24.2(a) of the Guides, which 
provides examples of terms that may be used to describe non-leather 
material with the appearance of leather. LIA claims that the definition 
and disclosure are needed because the term ``leatherette'' is 
misleading and potentially deceptive to consumers.\36\ LIA provides no 
evidence concerning consumer understanding of the term ``leatherette.'' 
It should be noted that when the word ``leather'' is included within 
the name or description of a non-leather material or product in a 
manner that indicates that the material or product is made of leather 
or contains leather, there is a strong possibility that use of the word 
may cause consumer deception. Section 24.2(d) of the Guides states that 
a word, term, depiction, or device should not be used if it 
misrepresents, directly or by implication, that an industry product is 
made in whole or in part from animal skin or hide, or that material in 
an industry product is leather or other material. Although the 
Commission agrees with LIA that the term ``leatherette'' may be 
deceptive, the suggested change is not being made because the Guides in 
their current form address non-leather material with the appearance of 
leather. There is no need for the specific definition endorsed by LIA. 
The type of material that LIA seeks to define as ``leatherette'' is not 
leather, so Section 24.2(a) provides guidance for content disclosure. 
Further, it should be noted that the list of examples of appropriate 
disclosure contained in Section 24.2(a) is not an exhaustive list, so 
there is no need to add additional terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Id. at 4, 12, and 13.
    \36\ Id. at 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    LIA's next suggestion is that the Guides more specifically define 
the term ``bonded leather.''\37\ In support of its suggestion, LIA says 
that it has analyzed material that it claims is erroneously labeled as 
bonded leather because the material is 80 percent synthetic material 
with an insubstantial coating of leather fibers on the underside.\38\ 
LIA argues that this material is not bonded leather because the leather 
fibers are not bonded to each other to form an independent, continuous 
layer, but are merely glued to the underside of an entirely different, 
synthetic product. LIA asserts that leather fibers in this material 
offer no utility or aesthetic value, and that manufacturers would 
likely include minor amounts of leather fibers to give the appearance 
of leather when inspected from the underside, thereby deceiving 
purchasers. To address these concerns, LIA suggests a definition of 
bonded leather that states that the product is made by forming leather 
fragments and fibers into a single homogenous sheet or roll with the 
aid of adhesives, resins, or similar bonding agents.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ Id. at 4 and 13-15.
    \38\ Id. at 14.
    \39\ Id. at 15. In its comment, LIA cites the definition used by 
the International Union of Leather Technologists and Chemists 
Societies (``IULTCS'') to describe ``reconstituted leather.'' 
IULTCS's definition is ``Made by forming leather fragments and 
fibres into sheet material with the aid of adhesives, resins, etc.'' 
LIA asks that the Commission further refine the IULTCS definition by 
adopting LIA's proposal.

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

[[Page 34629]]

    With regard to LIA's proposed definition of bonded leather, DRI 
states that consumers have not been harmed or deceived in the absence 
of this definition because ``the Guides already require disclosure of 
the percentage of leather and non-leather substances found in bonded 
leather used in consumer products.''\40\ DRI maintains that LIA's 
proposed definition would drive up costs to bonded leather 
manufacturers and businesses without any benefit to consumers, would be 
confusing both to businesses and consumers, and would have significant 
anti-competitive impacts on the bonded leather goods industry and 
marketplace. DRI asks that the FTC retain the Guides and their current 
labeling disclosure requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ DRI at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current Guides do not set a minimum leather fiber content for 
bonded leather material. Instead, Section 24.2(f) of the Guides states 
that if a term such as ``bonded leather'' is used, either a disclosure 
that the material is not leather or a disclosure of the percentage of 
leather fibers and the percentage of non-leather substances contained 
in the material should be made. An example of a proper disclosure 
provided in the Guides is ``Bonded Leather Containing 60% Leather 
Fibers and 40% Non-leather Substances.'' Such a disclosure effectively 
prevents deception which could be caused by the term ``bonded 
leather.'' Use of the term ``bonded leather'' without a truthful 
content disclosure is not in compliance with the Guides, regardless of 
the percentage of leather fiber content in the material so described. 
If a product is labeled in compliance with Section 24.2(f), consumers 
are made aware of the true composition of the product and are not 
deceived.
    The Guides' provision relating to bonded leather and similar 
material focuses on disclosure of the percentage of leather fibers and 
non-leather substances contained in the material, rather than on the 
method used to place leather fibers into the material as urged by LIA. 
There is insufficient information in the record to justify a 
distinction based upon the method by which leather fibers are placed 
into the material. Truthful content information, as outlined in the 
Guides, gives consumers the facts they need to make an informed 
decision regarding bonded leather and similar materials. For these 
reasons, the Commission is not adopting LIA's proposed definition of 
``bonded leather.''
    The last of LIA's suggested definitions is for the word 
``chamois.''\41\ SCI also requests a ``chamois'' definition.\42\ The 
LIA and SCI comments refer to an FTC advisory opinion issued in 1964 
that addressed the use of the word ``chamois,'' stating that it was 
deceptive to use the word ``chamois'' for a product not made from (a) 
the skin of the Alpine antelope or (b) sheepskin fleshers which have 
been oil-tanned after removal of the grain layer.\43\ The comments also 
discuss in detail the need for a definition, as well as the history and 
properties of chamois,\44\ but do not provide specific evidence 
regarding current consumer understanding of the term ``chamois.'' The 
most common use of chamois as described in these comments is for drying 
polished surfaces, glass, and car bodywork. Such drying products are 
outside of the scope of these Guides. There may be instances in which 
chamois is used in industry products covered by the Guides, but, as 
discussed above, there is no need to more specifically define different 
types of leather because the Guides apply to all types of leather. 
There are already provisions in the Guides to address 
misrepresentations and deceptive omissions. Under Section 24.1 of the 
current Guides, it is unfair or deceptive to misrepresent any material 
aspect of an industry product. As discussed above, Section 24.2(a) 
provides guidance about disclosures to be made for synthetic products 
with the appearance of leather. Also, under Section 24.2(b) of the 
Guides, a disclosure should be made of the type of leather in a product 
that is made of leather which has been processed to simulate the 
appearance of a different kind of leather. The requested definition has 
not been added to the Guides.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ LIA at 4, 15, and 21.
    \42\ SCI at 1.
    \43\ FTC Advisory Opinion No. 1, 66 F.T.C. 1593 (1964). A 
portion of this opinion relating to proper use of the term 
``chamois'' was published in the Code of Federal Regulations 
(``C.F.R.'') until 1989, when the Commission deleted Part 15 of 
Title 16 of the C.F.R. that contained the text of advisory opinions 
issued from November 1965 until June 1974. At the time that the 
provisions were deleted, the Commission noted that it was not 
required to publish the materials in the C.F.R. and that more 
complete versions of the materials were available elsewhere. The 
Commission concluded that there was little, if any, public benefit 
to justify the costs of publication. 50 Fed. Reg. 26187 (June 22, 
1989).
    \44\ LIA at 15-21; SCI at 1-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In summary, the Commission has decided that it will not add the 
suggested definitions to the Guides. However, the Commission would 
encourage industry efforts to inform consumers of the meaning of many 
of the proposed definitions, provided that the definitions are not 
misleading to consumers.
2. Scope of the Guides
    LIA suggests that the scope of the Guides be enlarged to include 
automotive and furniture upholstery products, stating that these 
products ``represent a significant portion of the leather industry, and 
the clear majority of finished leather produced in the United 
States.''\45\ LIA argues that enlarging the Guides to cover these 
products would reduce potential deception and confusion regarding these 
products.\46\ In addressing LIA's suggestion, the Commission notes that 
when the Leather Guides were adopted in 1996, it considered expansion 
of the Guides to cover additional products and decided that the record 
developed during that review did not warrant expansion of the Guides. 
As in the earlier review, the current record leaves unanswered 
questions regarding the extent of misrepresentations in other 
industries, consumer interpretation of the appearance of leather for 
products in other industries, and any special considerations for other 
industries. For these reasons, the Commission is not enlarging the 
scope of the Guides in the manner suggested by LIA. However, all 
members of the leather and imitation leather products industries can 
obtain useful guidance from the Guides. The Guides are interpretive of 
laws enforced by the Commission, which may take action against 
companies engaged in deception regardless of whether they fall within 
the scope of the Guides.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ Id. at 7.
    \46\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FDRA asks that the Guides be abandoned as they relate to footwear, 
arguing that there is no consumer preference for leather in the current 
footwear market and that consumer choice is instead based upon 
functionality and value.\47\ FDRA reasons that ``the Guides are based 
on the assumption that consumers believe all parts of shoes with an 
`appearance' of leather, are made of leather, regardless of what the 
distributor says or does not say in labeling or advertising about 
leather content.''\48\ FDRA argues that ``appearance'' is not defined, 
and that
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ FDRA at 1-2.
    \48\ Id. at 2.

     the Guides' emphasis on the assumed preference for leather is so 
great that the effect is that any shoe which does not disclose its 
contents ``appears'' to be leather. In essence, the Guides convert 
silence about shoe content into a claim of leather content and then 
require disclosure

[[Page 34630]]

to cure the ``misrepresentation'' created only by the Guides 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
themselves.

Id. FDRA urges the Commission to reconsider this approach, which it 
claims is flawed.
    In its comment, FDRA touts the enormous strides made in the 
development of synthetic materials, which it claims have replaced 
leather in many facets of footwear construction.\49\ Further, the 
association states that synthetic materials, which in some instances 
are more expensive than leather, have been developed to be light in 
weight and provide strength and durability which is superior to 
leather. In describing today's footwear styles, FDRA explains that such 
products ``are typically made from a variety of materials fitted 
together with leather and man-made overlays, interspersed with light, 
breathable textile materials, combined to create the comfort, fit, and 
`breathability' preferred by consumers.''\50\ Additionally, FDRA states 
that low priced synthetic shoes are widely accepted by consumers 
because they have many of the same comfort and performance 
characteristics as leather footwear at a fraction of the price.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ Id.
    \50\ Id. at 1.
    \51\ Id. at 2. FDRA claims that, because of the low price, 
consumers have no expectation that these items are made of leather. 
However, as discussed above, FDRA indicates that synthetic materials 
are more expensive than leather in some instances. Therefore, 
consumers cannot rely upon price to determine the true composition 
of a product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The basic premise of the Guides is the Commission's long-standing 
position that when a product has the appearance of leather, its 
appearance makes an implied representation that the product is made of 
leather. Clearly, a deceptive omission can arise from the physical 
appearance of a product, and the Guides' disclosure provisions are 
designed to correct such an omission. Despite FDRA's claims to the 
contrary, a product does not ``appear'' to be leather solely because of 
the absence of a content disclosure for the product. A synthetic 
product must first appear to be leather before the Guides' disclosure 
provisions would become applicable to the product. Thus, the Guides' 
disclosure provisions are limited to situations where consumers are 
likely to be misled as to a product's composition.
    While FDRA cites statistics regarding the percentages of leather 
and non-leather footwear for the U.S. footwear market and the types of 
footwear sold in the market,\52\ it does not provide evidence regarding 
consumer expectations regarding footwear with the appearance of 
leather. Whether or not there have been tremendous advances in 
synthetic materials, the record does not support a reversal of the 
Commission's long-standing position related to synthetic material with 
the appearance of leather.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ Id. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FDRA asks that, if the Guides remain applicable to footwear, the 
Commission make clear that the look or mere appearance of the shoe does 
not constitute a representation that the shoe is leather, either in 
whole or in part, and to make the Guides applicable only to 
misrepresentations of leather content.\53\ As discussed above, the 
implied representation made by the appearance of leather is a 
fundamental premise of the Guides. FDRA's suggested changes would 
thwart the primary goals of the Guides. Therefore, the Commission is 
not making the changes suggested by FDRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    Based upon the review discussed above, the Commission concludes 
that there is a continuing need for the Leather Guides, which are 
beneficial to consumers and industry members, and has decided to retain 
the Guides in their current form.

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 24

    Advertising, Belts, Distribution, Footwear, Imitation leather 
products, Labeling, Ladies' handbags, Leather and leather products 
industry, Luggage and related products, Shoes, Trade practices, Waist 
belts.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 41-58.
    By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark
Secretary
[FR Doc. E8-13656 Filed 6-17-08: 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-S