Back to the Future: Manufacturers' Warranties May Go Digital with Updates to the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.02.15
On Tuesday, September 8, 2015, an overwhelming majority in the House passed S. 1359, the E-Warranty Act of 2015, which, if enacted, would revise the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act to allow manufacturers to post consumer product warranties on their websites. The E-Warranty Act would also require the Federal Trade Commission to revise its implementing regulations (16 C.F.R. Part 700) accordingly.
The Senate unanimously passed the bill in July. The E-Warranty Act now heads to President Obama's desk.
The E-Warranty Act is reminiscent of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (E-Sign Act) signed into law by President Clinton in 2000. As with the E-Sign Act, the E-Warranty Act is meant to bring law out of the Paper Age—this time by using the Internet to promote easy and efficient access to warranty information while reducing costs for manufacturers and consumers alike.
Under current law, generally speaking, a warranty disclosure must be made in tangible, physical form, even if an online form is available. The E-Warranty Act would change course by permitting manufacturers to provide warranty information online only, so long as it is provided "in an accessible digital format on the Internet website of the manufacturer of the consumer product in a clear and conspicuous manner." Although the bill does not define "clear and conspicuous," the FTC routinely uses that phrase in consumer protection policy and enforcement activities and will have no difficulty interpreting and applying it to online warranties.
The Act preserves a consumer's right to access paper copies of warranties by non-digital means. It would require manufacturers who avail themselves of the Act's digital option to also provide "the phone number of the manufacturer, the postal mailing address of the manufacturer, or another reasonable non-Internet based means of contacting the manufacturer to obtain and review [the warranty] terms."
The 2000 E-Sign Act caused consternation and anxiety when first proposed, but was readily embraced after passage by companies and consumers alike. The E-Warranty Act should receive a similar reception. The Internet is hardly new technology, and industries are now accustomed to expansive consumer-facing use of their websites.
Still, the Act will bring significant change in how product manufacturers and sellers think of warranties and the publishing of their terms. Savvy entities should be taking steps now to prepare to convert their warranty worlds to the Internet age—with easily accessible web platforms, warranty text that is both clear and reader-friendly in electronic form, and related actions to move swiftly and smartly away from the paper world.
Other Articles in This Month's Edition:
- California Changes Its 'Made in the USA' Labeling Standard
- Back to the Future: Manufacturers' Warranties May Go Digital with Updates to the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
- FDA's Menu Nutrition Labeling Rule May Have the Unintended Consequence of Preserving the Status Quo
- R-E-V-E-R-S-A-L Spells Reversal! The Sixth Circuit Holds Varsity Brands' Cheerleading Uniform Designs to be Copyrightable
- Landmark EU Court Judgment on the Notification Requirements for Substances of Very High Concern
- Identifying Endocrine Disruptors in the European Union
- Advertisers in the Ring – A Roundup of This Month's Competitor Advertising Challenges: the Importance of Syncing Test Results to Claims
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25
On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
