Tag Archives: federal trade commission

FTC Reports Unwanted Telemarketing Calls Down More Than 50 Percent



Today, the Federal Trade Commission released National Do Not Call Registry Data Book for the Fiscal Year 2024, which shows that consumer reports about unwanted calls continue to drop for the third straight year, with complaint volume down by more than half since 2021.

The FTC has pursued a multifaceted strategy to crack down on unwanted calls. In 2023, the agency announced Operation Stop Scam Calls, the largest crackdown in illegal telemarketing in the agency’s history. 

This year, the agency issued a rule banning impersonation of government or business, and expanded the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR) to protect businesses facing illegal telemarketing. The FTC is also confronting emerging threats such as voice cloning, by launching a Voice Cloning Challenge and clarifying the the TSR covers AI-enabled scam calls.

“Illegal calls remain a scourge, but the FTC’s strategy to pursue upstream players and equip the agency to confront emerging threats is showing clear signs of success,” said Sam Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “In the years to come, it will be critical we continue this progress by confronting not only telemarketers but those firms who knowingly profit from scam calls.”

The Verge reported complaints about unwanted telemarketing calls have dropped for the third straight year, the Federal Trade Commission announced yesterday. 

Reports of such calls have fallen by over 50 percent versus 2021, according to the FTC — a decline that could be thanks in no small part to stepped-up government efforts to fight irritating telemarketing and phone scams.

There were about 33,000 fewer unwanted call complaints during the 2024 fiscal year versus the year prior, writes the FTC. The drop affected all sorts of unwanted calls, although the agency writes that reports about net reduction calls had jumped “more than 85 percent from last year.”

As for what the FTC has actually been doing, it points to its crackdowns on illegal telemarketing last year, and its rules that ban the impersonation of governments or businesses. The agency also cite its Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR), which places a number of restrictions on telemarketers — like when they make their calls — and its clarification that the TSR applies on scam calls that use AI, too.

PCMag reported consumer reports about unwanted telemarketing calls are down by more than half since 2021, according to a report from the Federal Trade Commission.

This is the third year the FTC has recorded a drop in spam calls. Overall, there were roughly 33,000 fewer unwanted call complaints during the 2024 fiscal year compared to 2023.

The FTC also highlighted a February FCC that said calls made with AI-generated voices are “artificial,” and therefore illegal under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. (TCPA).

In my opinion, the FTC is doing a great job to protect consumers from fraudulent calls from disreputable people who desperately want to steal someone else’s money.


The US FTC Releases Four Year Study On Social Media Sites Collecting Data



The Federal Trade Commission posted a Press Release titled: FTC Staff Report Finds Large Social Media and Video Streaming Companies Have Engaged In Vast Surveillance of Users with Lax Privacy Controls and Inadequate Safeguards for Kids and Teens.

A new Federal Trade Commission staff report that examines the data collection and use practices of major social media and video streaming services shows they engaged in vast surveillance of consumers in order to monetize their personal information while failing to adequately protect users online, especially children and teens.

The staff report is based on responses to 6(b) orders issued in December 2020 to nine companies including some of the largest social media and video streaming services: Amazon.com, Inc., which owns gaming platform Twitch; Facebook Inc. (now Meta Platforms, Inc.); YouTube LLC; Twitter, Inc. (now X Corp); Snap Inc; ByteDance Ltd., which owns the video-sharing platform TikTok; Discord Inc,; Reddit, Inc.; and WhatsApp Inc.

The orders asked for information about how the companies collect, track and use personal and demographic information, how they determine which ads and other content are shown to consumers, whether and how they apply algorithms or data analytics to personal and demographic information, and how their practice impact children and teens.

The Guardian reported social media and online video companies are collecting huge troves of your personal information on and off their websites or apps and sharing it with a wide range of third-party entities, a new Federal Trade Commission (FTC) staff report on nine tech companies confirms.

The FTC report published on Thursday looked at the data gathering practices of Facebook, WhatsApp, YouTube, Discord, Reddit, Amazon, Snap, TikTok, and Twitter/X between January 2019 and 31 December 2020. The majority of the companies’ business models incentivized tracking how people engaged with their platforms, collecting their personal data and using it to determine what content and ads users see on their feeds, the report states.

CBS News reported child advocates have long complained that federal child privacy laws let social media services off the hook provided their products are not directed at kids and that their policies formally bar minors on their sites. Big tech companies also often claim not to know how many kids use their platforms, critics have noted.

The report recommends steps, including federal legislation, to limit surveillance and give consumers rights over their data.

Congress is also moving to hold tech companies accountable for how online content affects kids. In July, the Senate overwhelmingly passed bipartisan legislation aimed at protecting children called the Kids Online Safety Act. The bill would require companies strengthen kids’ privacy and give parents more control over what content their children see online.

In my opinion, I think the FTC is correct about not only providing their press release, but also to alert parents that not all social media sites are safe for their children and teens.


Net Neutrality Is Back As FCC Votes To Regulate Internet Providers



The US government on Thursday banned internet service providers (ISPs) from meddling in the speeds their customers receive when browsing the web and downloading files, restoring tough rules rescinded during the Trump administration and setting the state for a major legal battle with the broadband industry, CNN reported.

The net neutrality regulations adopted Thursday by the Federal Communications Commission prohibit providers such as AT&T, Comcast and Verizon from selectively speeding up, slowing down or blocking users’ internet traffic. They largely reflect rules passed by a prior FCC in 2015 and unwound in 2017.

The latest rules show how, with a 3-2 Democratic majority, the FCC is moving to reassert its authority over an industry that powers the modern digital economy touching everything from education to health care and enabling advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence.

With Thursday’s party-line vote, the FCC redefined internet service as similar to legacy telephone lines, a sweeping move that comes with greater regulatory power over the broadband industry. And the FCC said it would step in to override state or local policies that conflict with the federal net neutrality rule.

ArsTechnica reported the Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 to impose net neutrality rules today, restoring the common-carrier regulatory framework enforced during the Obama era and then abandoned while Trump was president.

The rules prohibit internet service providers from blocking and throttling lawful content and ban paid prioritization. Cable and telecom companies plan to fight the rules in court, but they lost a similar battle during the Obama era when judges upheld FCC’s ability to regulate ISPs as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act.

“Consumers have made it clear to us they do not want their broadband provider cutting sweetheart deals, with fast lanes for some services and slow lanes for others,” FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said at today’s meeting. “They do not want their providers engaging in blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization. And if they have problems, they expect the nation’s expert authority on communications to be able to respond. Because we put national rules back on the books, we fix that today.”

TechCrunch reported the Federal Communications Commission made its official vote Thursday to reinstate net neutrality,  which bars broadband providers from slowing or even blocking traffic to some sites while improving access to others that pay extra fees. 

With some changes and protections, passing the order titled Safeguarding and Securing the Open Internet resorts rules passed back during the Obama administration in 2015 and rolled back in 2017, after Donald Trump was elected president.

Rosenworcel summed it up best: “I think in a modern digital economy we should have a national net neutrality policy and make clear the nation’s expert on communications has the ability to act when it comes to broadband.”

In my opinion, whether or not the US gets to enjoy net neutrality depends largely upon if the FCC has more Democrats or more Republicans. Right now, it appears that net neutrality is going to stick around.


FTC Says Genetic Testing Company Failed To Protect User Privacy



The U.S. Federal Trade Commission posted a press release titled: “FTC Says Genetic Testing Company 1Health Failed to Protect Privacy and Security of DNA Data and Unfairly Changed Its Privacy Policy”. From the press release:

The Federal Trade Commission charged that the genetic testing firm 1Health.io left sensitive genetic and health data unsecured, deceived consumers about their ability to get their data deleted, and changed its privacy policy retroactively without without already notifying and obtaining consent from consumers whose data the company had the company had already collected.

As part of a proposed settlement with the FTC, 1Health will be required to strengthen protections for genetic information and instruct third-party contract laboratories to destroy all consumer DNA samples that have been retained for more than 180 days.

“Companies that try to change the rules by re-writing their privacy policy are on notice,” Said Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “The FTC Act prohibits companies from unilaterally applying material privacy policy changes to previously collected data.”

California-based 1Health.io, Inc, also known as Vitagene, Inc. before changing its name in October 2020, has sold DNA health test kits and used DNA test results, along with information consumers supplied, to provide consumer with reports about their health, wellness, and ancestry as part of product packages that cost between $29 and $259. The health reports include personal information about a consumer’s health and genetics, such as their risk for developing health problems based on their genotype data…

…As part of the proposed order, 1Health.io, which Vitagene is now known as, must pay $75,000, which the FTC intends to use for consumer refunds. In addition to the DNA deletion requirement, under the proposed order the company:

  • Will be prohibited from sharing health data with third parties – including information provided by consumers before and after its 2020 privacy policy change – without obtaining consumers’ affirmative express consent;
  • Must ensure any company that purchases all or parts of 1Health’s business agrees by contract to adhere to provisions of the order;
  • Must notify the FTC about incidents of unauthorized disclosure of consumers’ personal health data; and
  • Must implement a comprehensive information security program addressing the security failures outlined in the complaint.

The Commission voted 3-0 to issue the proposed administrative complaint and to accept the consent agreement with the company…

The Federal Trade Commission wrote: …Vitagene, a San Francisco based DNA testing company, promised consumers that it exceeded industry-standard security practices for maintaining the privacy of people’s sensitive health and genetic information. But the FTC says the company didn’t keep that promise. In fact, the FTC says Vitagene use a well-known cloud service provider to store people’s confidential information but didn’t use built-in cloud security measures…

In my opinion, it sounds like Vitagene / 1Health.io lied to its customers about how secure their DNA information was. It seems fair that the FTC decided to crackdown on the company and make it pay a lot of money for its terrible choices.


FTC Launched New Office Of Technology To Bolster Agency’s Work



The U.S. Federal Trade Commission FTC) posted a press release titled: “FTC Launches New Office of Technology to Bolster Agency’s Work”. From the press release:

The Federal Trade Commission today launched a new Office of Technology that will strengthen the FTC’s ability to keep pace with technological challenges in the digital marketplace by supporting the agency’s law enforcement and policy work.

“For more than a century, the FTC has worked to keep pace with new markets and ever-changing technologies by building internal expertise,” said Chair Lina M. Khan. “Our office of technology is a natural next step in ensuring we have the in-house skills needed to fully grasp evolving technologies and market trends as we continue to tackle unlawful business practices and protect Americans.”

The Office of Technology will have dedicated staff and resources, and will be headed by Chief Technology Officer Stephanie T. Nguyen.

Here is what the Office of Technology will do:

Strengthen and support law enforcement investigations and actions: The office will support FTC investigations into business practices and the technologies underlying them. This includes helping to develop appropriate investigative techniques, assisting in the review and analysis of data and documents received in investigations, and aiding in the creation of effective remedies.

Advise and engage with staff and the Commission on policy and research initiatives: The office will work with FTC staff and the Commission to provide technological expertise on non-enforcement actions including 6(b) studies, reports, requests for information, policy statements, congressional briefings, and other initiatives.

Highlight market trends emerging technologies that impact the FTC’s work: The office will engage with the public and external stakeholders through workshops, research conference, and consultations and highlight key trends and best practices.

The Washington Post reported that the FTC has long been dwarfed by Silicon Valley titans like Google and Apple, each staffed with thousands of engineers and technologists.

According to The Washington Post, FTC leaders are hoping combining and expanding their forces into a dedicated tech unit will help keep up with the rapid advancements across the industry – and to keep it in check.

The Washington Post also reported that the FTC’s announcement arrives at a critical juncture. Federal regulators are dialing up investigations into tech behemoths like Amazon and waging blockbuster legal battles against Microsoft and Facebook company Meta.

The agency voted to approve the office’s creation in a 4-0 vote Thursday. It marks the first vote by Republican Commissioner Christine Wilson made public since she announced plans to “soon” retire from the agency on Thursday.

reported that the FTC has long been dwarfed by Silicon Valley titans like Google and Apple, each staffed with thousands of engineers and technologists.

According to The Washington Post, FTC leaders are hoping combining and expanding their forces into a dedicated tech unit will help keep up with the rapid advancements across the industry – and to keep it in check.

The Washington Post also reported that the FTC’s announcement arrives at a critical juncture. Federal regulators are dialing up investigations into tech behemoths like Amazon and waging blockbuster legal battles against Microsoft and Facebook company Meta.

The agency voted to approve the office’s creation in a 4-0 vote Thursday. It marks the first vote by Republican Commissioner Christine Wilson made public since she announced plans to “soon” retire from the agency on Thursday.

Personally, I’m not entirely clear on how this all shakes out. I’m going to guess that the new office will give the FTC the ability to keep up with Google and Apple (among other tech companies) and perhaps enact sanctions if a huge company is doing something egregious.


The Ghost Of Instagram Haunts Microsoft’s Future



The catchy headline at the top of this blog post was the title Reuters selected for its article. It is an ominous sounding title, indicating that Microsoft will have difficulty with the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC’s) lawsuit against the company.

Reuters reported that Facebook is Microsoft’s antitrust boogeyman. The U.S. regulatory agency, the Federal Trade Commission, is seeking to block the software titan’s $69 billion deal for gaming giant Activision Blizzard, partly to stop domination of the industry as it evolves. The FTC’s leader Lina Khan might be making up for regulators who waved through Mark Zuckerberg’s $1 billion purchase of Instagram. Though Microsoft’s deal is different, punishment under Khan’s regime seemed inevitable.

According to Reuters, the FTC is concerned that Microsoft, the owner of the Xbox gaming console, will withhold popular games made by Activision, including Call of Duty and World of Warcraft from competing platforms including Sony’s PlayStation and Nintendo’s Switch. Microsoft has tried to appease this concern. This month, the company led by Satya Nadella agreed to offer games to Nintendo and Sony for 10 years.

The New York Times posted an article titled: “Lina Kahn, Aiming to Block Microsoft’s Activision Deal, Faces a Challenge”. This is a more optimistic title than the one Reuters chose. The New York Times reported that Lina Khan has pledged to usher in a new era of trustbusting of America’s corporate giants, recently saying the agency plans to “enforce the antitrust laws to ensure maximal efficacy.”

According to The New York Times, Ms. Khan has staked that ambitious agenda on a case that may be highly challenging for the agency to win. Ms. Khan and the FTC face hurdles in trying to stop the Microsoft-Activision deal, experts said. That’s because courts have been skeptical of challenges to so-called vertical mergers, where the two businesses don’t compete directly. In this case, Microsoft is best known in gaming as the maker of the Xbox console, while Activision is a major publisher of blockbuster titles such as Call of Duty.

The New York Times also reported that Microsoft has vowed to fight the FTCs lawsuit against the Activision purchase. On Thursday, Brad Smith, Microsoft’s president, said the company had “complete confidence in our case and welcome the opportunity to present it in court.” On Friday Microsoft pointed to previous statements that it believes the deal would expand competition and create more opportunities for gamers and game developers.

The Wall Street Journal reported that in the typical antitrust case, the government challenges a horizontal merger, or one involving rivals that compete head-to-head. Such mergers, by removing a competitor from the marketplace, can increase concentration, a factor that can be used to infer harmful effects such as higher prices.

According to The Wall Street Journal, the government has struggled to win cases on vertical mergers because making claims about the potential future harms posed by such deals is less straightforward and can require complex speculation about how market forces might play out.

Personally, I think it is going to take a very long time to sort this situation out in court. This is happening during the holiday season, and I cannot help but wonder if gamers who wanted to buy a console will hold off until they know the outcome of the Microsoft – Activision Blizzard acquisition.


Musical.ly Fined $5.7 Million for Collecting Personal Information from Children



The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that the operators of the video social networking app Musical.ly (now known as TikTok) have agreed to pay $5.7 million to settle FTC allegations that the company illegally collected personal information form children. This is the largest civil penalty ever obtained by the FTC in a children’s privacy case.

The FTC’s complaint (which filed by the Department of Justice on behalf of the FTC), alleged that Musical.ly violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), which requires that websites and online services directed to children obtain parental consent before collecting personal information from children under the age of 13.

User accounts were public by default, which means a child’s profile bio, username, picture and videos could be seen by other users. Changing the setting to private did not make the profile private. Users could still send direct messages to private Musical.ly accounts.The complaint noted that there had been public reports of adults trying to contact users via the Musical.ly app.

The FTC complaint said that operators of the Musical.ly app were aware that a significant percentage of users were younger than 13 and received thousands of complaints from parents that their children under 13 had created Musical.ly accounts.

TikTok posted information on its newsroom about how they will work with the FTC in conjunction with the agreement. TikTok will split users into age-appropriate TikTok environments, in line with FTC guidance for mixed audience apps. The environment for younger users will not permit the sharing of personal information. It also places limits on content and user interactions.

There are two things can be learned from this situation. One is that companies that have apps or websites that collect user’s personal information really need to take steps to ensure that the data from children is kept private. Failing to do so could result in a huge fine.

The other lesson is that parents should not assume that an app will protect their child’s data – or keep their child’s profile private. Take the time to see what the app collects, and how protective their privacy settings are before allowing your child to use it.