From marketers with millions or billions in annual revenue to the individual who finally decided to sell that "Casablanca" LaserDisc years after getting rid of the player, the case heard Monday by the Supreme Court of the United States may affect all of them. All states may ultimately force all marketers to collect sales tax. But what concerns the plaintiffs—the Direct Marketing Association—even more is that states may also force marketers to turn over information about the buyers, and states may have the right to do so without sellers being able to fight it in federal court. The court is expected to issue a ruling in DMA vs. Brohl by June 2015.
Marketers beware: A Supreme Court ruling this week could lead to more false-advertising lawsuits. The unanimous decision issued Tuesday set new rules for which companies have the standing to sue under the decades-old Lanham Act, a federal law businesses use when suing each other over false ad claims. Previously, lower courts had interpreted the statute inconsistently, with some allowing for more lawsuits and others taking a more restrictive stance
By Denny Hatch The Color of Her Underwear I get the sense that U.S. direct marketers find the European Union's paranoia over privacy and the highly restrictive, bureaucratic rules over what data can and cannot be used for to be a monumental nuisance that gets in the way of doing business. However, the European fear of privacy loss is very real, harking back to Germany in the 1930s and the Nazi persecution of Jews and gypsies. Despite the fact that we saved their bacon in World War II, Europe has every reason to distrust American technology. Edwin Black's new book, "IBM and the