Add Mark Cuban to the list of those stumping for updating the Electronic Communications Privacy Act to require a warrant for government access to e-mail regardless of how, where and how long it has been stored.

The E-Mail Privacy Act, which was debated earlier this week in the House Judiciary Committee (http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/washington/house-judiciary-debates...), would make that change to the 1986 law to reflect the way e-mail is used and stored today, argue its supporters, including Cuban.

In a letter to congressional leaders, a copy of which was obtained by B&C/Multichannel News, the billionaire tech investor and chairman of AXS tv urged Congress to reject the entreaties of the Securities & Exchange Commission, which argues that, since the SEC can't seek a criminal warrant, if that became the standard it would not have sufficient authority to obtain important information, and that that would encourage ponzi schemers and inside traders to be non-cooperative in document production.

Cuban said that, as the target of an SEC investigation himself, he knows firsthand what investigative tools they already have to obtain information, and doesn't think those are insufficient.

SEC called for tweaking the bill to insure it can still access information it needs from ISPs. Cuban says the SEC should not be allowed to do that and called for passage of both the EPA and the Senate Communications Privacy Act Amendments of 2015 bill, both of which would require a warrant for content, and without carve-outs for agencies like the SEC.

The Consumer Federation of America has joined with Consumers Union and others to urge the Federal Trade Commission to require TV and radio automotive ads that make general fuel economy claims to back them up with EPA miles-per-gallon (MPG) numbers.

Car ads are a big driver of local TV ad sales.

The FTC is seeking comment on economy claims, how they relate to deceptive and unfair claims under the FTC Act, and whether general claims not backed up with EPA numbers may be deceptive.

"Anytime an advertising claim or mention is made about fuel economy (i.e., 'great mileage,' 'fuel efficient,' 'savings at the pump,' 'best in class for fuel efficiency' etc.) the EPA mpg numbers must be clearly presented. In TV and radio ads, there should also be a clear, audible representation of the mpg."

They also argue that only using a highway average for the MPG in an ad is deceptive since it is unlikely that would be the regular fuel consumption number. They argue that ads should either 1) provide all three numbers--city, highway and combined-- with combined in the largest font in a TV ad or the last number mentioned in a radio ad, or 2) provide combined only in circumstances where ad content is limited.

They argue providing simply one unidentified number, says 37 mpg (which is almost always the highway, which is the highest) is deceptive. They also say "up to" claims are also deceptive.

They also advise against allowing any but the EPA standard to be used in ads. "The only way to avoid significant deception is to allow ONLY the EPA ratings to be used in advertising. "There are many ways to measure a vehicle’s potential gas mileage and, as such, allowing alternative mileage rating systems would substantially increase deceptive advertising related to this important consumer purchase information."

For electric vehicles, they want an MPGe disclosure, which is a miles-per-gallon equivalent.