News, Consumer

FTC Levies $1.1M Fine Against Razer for Misleading COVID Claims on ‘N95’ Mask

In a significant development, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) imposed a hefty $1.1 million fine on Razer on Tuesday. The action follows allegations that the gaming accessory giant misled consumers by falsely asserting that its flashy Zephyr mask was certified as N95-grade.

Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, expressed concern over Razer’s actions, stating, “These businesses falsely claimed, in the midst of a global pandemic, that their face mask was the equivalent of an N95 certified respirator.” He emphasized the FTC’s commitment to holding accountable companies that resort to false and unsubstantiated claims to target consumers’ health and safety decisions.

Razer’s Statement

In response, Razer contested the FTC’s assertions, stating, “We disagree with the FTC’s allegations and did not admit to any wrongdoing as part of the settlement.” The company reiterated its commitment to creating top-notch products for gamers while expressing regret over the distraction caused by the litigation.

Razer clarified that while it never intended to mislead anyone, it promptly took action to address the issue by refunding customers and discontinuing sales of the Zephyr mask. The company emphasized that the Zephyr was conceived to offer an innovative face covering option for the community.

The FTC’s order not only imposes the fine but also prohibits the sale of the mask and any COVID-related health misrepresentations or unsubstantiated claims about protective health equipment. It mandates that defendants refrain from making health-related claims about protective goods and services without reliable scientific evidence.

The filing alleges that Razer deliberately misled consumers into believing that the $100 mask would provide protection against COVID. Given the heightened concern surrounding the virus when the product was launched in October 2021, the implications of the FTC’s action are significant.

Currently, the order is pending approval and signature from a District Court judge

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *