Implications of the federal court order banning the terms "light'' and "mild'': what difference could it make?
Implications of the federal court order banning the terms "light'' and "mild'': what difference could it make?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1136/tc.2006.019349
复制
发表时间：
2007-08-01
期刊：
影响因子：
5.2
通讯作者：
Glantz, Stanton A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Anderson, Stacey J.;Ling, Pamela M.;Glantz, Stanton A.
联邦地区法官格拉迪斯·凯斯勒发现，美国主要的烟草公司违反了《受诈骗者影响和腐败组织法》，通过欺骗性地推销“淡味”香烟来欺骗公众。凯斯勒法官的裁决禁止被告烟草公司通过使用误导性的术语，如“清淡”，“温和”或“低焦油”，或通过其他间接手段暗示健康益处。这项裁决可以狭义地解释为仅仅禁止某些词语，也可以广义地解释为禁止以任何其他方式，包括颜色、数字或图像暗示健康益处。重要的是要包括间接传播，因为烟草公司很容易绕过狭隘的广告禁令。狭义的解释将不符合法院关于该行业欺诈意图的全面事实调查结果。对该命令的广泛解释，包括现有品牌、产品线扩展和新的烟草产品，如作为“烟草”销售的潜在减少接触的产品，凯斯勒法官的命令可能对保护健康作出重大贡献。
Federal District Judge Gladys Kessler found that the major American tobacco companies violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, defrauding the public by deceptively marketing " light'' cigarettes. Judge Kessler's ruling prohibits the defendant tobacco companies from implying health benefits through using misleading terms such as "light'', "mild'' or "low- tar'', or through other indirect means. This ruling could be interpreted narrowly as simply prohibiting certain words, or could be interpreted broadly as prohibiting implying health benefits by any other means, including colour, numbers or images. It is important to include indirect communications, as tobacco companies easily circumvent narrow advertising bans. A narrow interpretation would be inconsistent with the court's comprehensive factual findings of fraudulent intent by the industry. A broad interpretation of the Order, including existing brands, line extensions and new tobacco products such as potential reduced exposure products that are marketed as "cigarettes'', Judge Kessler's order could make a substantial contribution to protecting health.