WASHINGTON — The FTC said Tuesday that Neiman Marcus and two other retailers have agreed to settle charges that they claimed certain products were made of "faux" fur when they actually contained real fur.
In addition to the upscale department store operator, the retailers include DrJays.com Inc. and Eminent Inc., doing business as Revolve Clothing.
The Federal Trade Commission said the companies also violated federal laws by not naming the animal that the fur came from.
The FTC also charged that The Neiman Marcus Group Inc. claimed that a rabbit fur product had mink fur, and failed to disclose where the fur came from for three fur products.
The Neiman Marcus violations involved website claims related to a Burberry Outerwear jacket, a Stuart Weitzman ballerina flat shoe and an Alice + Olivia Kyah coat. Neiman Marcus also misrepresented the fur content of the shoe in its catalog, at bergdorfgoodman.com, and in advertisements mailed to consumers, the FTC said.
The FTC said DrJays.com misrepresented the fur content and failed to disclose the animal name for a snorkel jacket by Crown Holder with a fur-lined hood, a vest by Knoles & Carter with exterior fur and a New York subway leather bomber jacket by United Face with fur lining.
Meanwhile, Eminent, doing business as Revolve, misrepresented the fur content and failed to disclose the animal name for four products including fur-trimmed boots, a Mark Jacobs Runway roebling coat, a Dakota Xan fur poncho and an Eryn Brinie belted faux fur vest, the FTC said.
Under the proposed settlement, the retailers would be prohibited from violating the laws for 20 years.
The commission approved the consent order for public comment with a 4-0 vote. The deals remain subject to public comment for 30 days, after which the commission will decide whether to make them final.


The ones responsible should just take a plastic bag, wrap it tight around thier dumba$$ knoggins and breath deep...
Those Jewish guys just lost a customer.
Fur is tacky, I don't think people who wear it realize how many stink eyes they get in one day.
I can usually tell the difference. Whenever I see someone wearing "fur" I look pretty closely and if it looks to be very real, they DO receive said stink eye AND a lecture to boot. They're just lucky I don't carry my red spray-paint cans anymore.
Must be nice to be behind a computer throwing insults at perfect strangers, loser. Oh and BTW I can afford pretty much anything I want but people who wear fur just look like ghetto trash.
"Under the proposed settlement, the retailers would be prohibited from violating the laws for 20 years." OOOOOO SUPER SCARY PUNISHMENT! wtf!!!!!
Elizabeth, you are the lucky one that you don't carry the red spray paint. To attack someone with paint is still assault. If you destroy a fur of high value, you could be sued for the value of your house to pay for it. So happened to one woman in the early 90's who painted a woman's white sable.
If I had the $ and lived in the cold country, I would LOVE to have a full length Sable coat. Sad but true. BTW Neimans..... you have NO business telling stories. Doesn't make sense
Personally, I think fake fur is tacky. Why bother with something that looks and feels synthetic. Do you have a deep desire to spray paint leather shoes or leather coats or pursed it's pretty much the same as a fur just further processed? Would you deface the hair on hide throw pillow on my leather sofa? I'm certain you have something to say about the axis hide I am tanning for throw pillows. Personally, I think if you are going to harvest an animal for meat (cow, sheep, rabbits etc) then that life should certainly provide more than just meat for the freezer.
In my mind it is a tragedy when endangered species are targeted for nothing more than a pelt. But, then there are some from different cultures who would say it provides money to put food on their tables.
To revisit that whole "spray paint" mentality to ruin personal property, that is one of the top ten dumbest publicity stunts of the me generation of the 90's. I get the who spoiled baby mentality and attracting attention. People without the ability to communicate often go to drastic lengths to feel important. It is certainly easy enough for someone to think by defacing private property (fur coat) they are some how elevating their own consciousness. When in fact they are negating the life and purpose of an animal that was harvested for a pelt. We can only hope that the animal provided more than just a pelt.
Two things...
That is all.
I agree about your 2nd part, however, if you looked more into this story, some fur is actually CHEAPER than the fake stuff which is why retailers would use it and claim it to be fake. Keeping animals in inhumane conditions and than brutally killing them for their fur is cheaper than high quality "fake fur" which is utterly disgusting.
Do you have any idea how many toxic chemicals it takes to make faux fur? If you make a list for both real fur and faux fur, and list pros and cons, real fur is much better for everyone except the critters. And, I eat critters, so just using the leftovers is an extra benefit.
Back in the 1980's, in Chicago, I was having lunch at a fast food place on Chicago Ave., just west of Michigan Ave. There were 8 or 10 young people whispering loudly and arguing, while eating their hamburger lunches. About a half hour later, they were outside of Neiman Marcus's front door, protesting animal treatment, as they digested their ground beef lunch.
Let me eat my omnivorous lunch and wear my fur and leather coats, and I won't laugh at you trying to protect varmints.
I worked at a mink farm one summer when I was in school - and I can't think of ever being hungry enough to eat one of those stinky things...
@ Mifo, I was referring to beef and leather, for eating and wearing. But, the NUTRIA is a large rodent that lives in South America. It is a staple of the local's diet. When missionaries told Rome they couldn't get the natives to stop eating nutria/meat on Friday's in Lent, the pope declared the nutria to be a fish, because it spent so much time in the water. And, you would be surprised at what you will try to eat, when you are starving.
Anyone who supports the fur industry is the scum of the earth and one day when you experience your life review on the other side, you're going to feel exactly what that poor defenseless animal felt while it had its skin ripped off its body while still alive, and you'll deserve it.
Well Elizabeth, so much for compassion and forgiveness for your fellow man. See you on the other side. Did you ever see an eagle tear apart its prey? It's fascinating. It's nature, and we are part of nature. Plants are alive, so even if you're vegan, you kill something to stay alive. But then again, it's where you draw the line that counts.
Elizabeth.....
I am scum of the earth
Finally! Like hunting?? What does that have to do with the way the fur is stripped from raccoon dogs in China--WHILE THE ANIMALS ARE STILL ALIVE!!!!!!!!! LOOK IT UP!
If that's what they do in China, not in the United States, shouldn't you go to China to protest. I've never met anyone that would even try to skin an animal alive, well, except for the American Indians in movies, when they skin the white men alive.
Uncle Ben...Fukkin white man is the one's whom started the scapling @!$%#...NOT the Indians....
Fur hags deserve to have @!$%# thrown on them...=)
@ Stephanie, there's a big difference between scalping and skinning.
Jeez, Stephanie, have you ever heard of anger management? Or, there's a pill for that...And nobody deserves to have @!$%# thrown on them, not even you.
There is no reason in today's age to do to those poor, helpless creatures what humanKIND does. It really sickens me to my stomach. Reason though why this fur might be cheaper: it may come from China and actually be dog or cat fur. And yes, that's why I can hate a whole country. People know what they do to them to get their fur. It is a disgrace all over the world, and some people (see above) just don't get it and are in desperate need of compassion. These animals feel pain just like we do and the way they are treated until their demise is also despicable. So very sad.
I agree about the last part of the article being total BS....shouldn't they be prohibited from violating the law forever?! Jeesh!