The FTC is seeking public comment on changes to its impersonation rules to address growing complaints about AI-driven impersonation, the agency announced Thursday. The FTC issued a supplemental NPRM that would prohibit such impersonation. It would extend protections of a new rule on government and business impersonation the commission expected to finalize Thursday. The FTC said it issued the supplemental notice in response to “surging complaints around impersonation fraud, as well as public outcry about the harms caused to consumers and to impersonated individuals.” AI-generated deepfakes could “turbocharge this scourge, and the FTC is committed to using all of its tools to detect, deter, and halt impersonation fraud,” the agency added. The new rule allows the FTC to seek monetary relief from scammers in federal court. The public comment period will open for 60 days once the supplemental rule is published in the Federal Register. Meanwhile, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) on Thursday proposed legislation that would establish new penalties for AI-created deepfakes. The bill is included in her fiscal 2025 executive budget. It would create misdemeanor charges for “unauthorized uses of a person’s voice” and establish a private right of action to seek damages for harms associated with digitally manipulated images. The bill would “require disclosures on digitized political communications published within 60 days of an election.”
The Shortwave Modernization Coalition (SMC) filed a Roberson and Associates technical analysis at the FCC discussing the coalition’s proposal for amending the commission’s eligibility and technical rules for industrial/business pool licensees to authorize licensed use of frequencies above 2 MHz and below 25 MHz for fixed, long-distance, non-voice communications (see 2305010053). The proposal is controversial, especially among amateur operators (see 2308180033). The analysis shows the proposed use of this band “can be implemented without interfering with other users, and we look forward to engaging with federal stakeholders, other interested parties, and FCC staff to address any issues and move this matter forward,” said a filing posted Wednesday in RM-11953.
Public interest and consumer groups urged the FCC take a more aggressive stance on a November Further NPRM about protecting consumers from SIM swapping and port-out fraud (see 2311150042). CTIA said the commission should “pursue a flexible and risk-based approach” toward customer account security and fraud deterrence. Reply comments were due this week in docket 21-341, and they largely mirror initial comments (see 2401180053).
The FTC’s proposed rules for moderating fake online reviews are overly broad and carry liability risks that will result in platforms censoring legitimate reviews on sites like Google, Facebook and Yelp, the Interactive Advertising Bureau said Tuesday.
Industry is calling on the FCC to revise a robocall item, set for a commissioner vote Thursday, which codifies some robocall and robotexting rules while asking about applying protections in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act to communications from wireless carriers to their own subscribers (see 2401250068). Industry officials told us they’re not certain the FCC will make the changes they seek, though they expect tweaks.
Pennsylvania’s biggest incumbent, Verizon, launched an all-out attack on state USF in comments Friday, urging that the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission eliminate the fund. The carrier said the USF is archaic. In addition, AT&T joined Verizon in urging the PUC to reduce regulations, such as carrier of last resort (COLR) obligations. However, rural LECs argued that they will continue needing state USF support for as long as Pennsylvania heavily regulates them.
California could be first in the nation to codify the FCC’s definition of digital discrimination into state law. Assemblymember Mia Bonta (D) introduced AB-2239 on Wednesday, the California Alliance for Digital Equity said Thursday. “This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to adopt subsequent legislation that codifies a definition of ‘digital discrimination of access’ in state law that conforms to the definition adopted by the Federal Communications Commission,” said a legislative digest on the measure. In a November order (see 2311150040), the FCC defined “digital discrimination of access” as “policies or practices, not justified by genuine issues of technical or economic feasibility, that (1) differentially impact consumers' access to broadband internet access service based on their income level, race, ethnicity, color, religion, or national origin or (2) are intended to have such differential impact.” Defining digital discrimination could help move a proceeding on digital redlining at the California Public Utilities Commission, said Shayna Englin, California Community Foundation director-digital equity initiative, in an interview. The proceeding stalled amid argument about the definition, said Englin. CPUC digital redlining rules would guide the agency in the years ahead as it distributes $8 billion state and federal broadband funding, she said. Englin predicted a fight between digital equity advocates and the telecom industry, which is expected to oppose AB-2239. The California Broadband and Video Association is reviewing the legislation, said a spokesperson for the state cable group. USTelecom declined to comment. The Los Angeles City Council passed a similar law at the local level last month.
Satellite operators continue having diverse views on using shot clocks to hasten earth station and satellite application reviews, according to docket 22-411 reply comments this week. In September, commissioners on a 4-0 vote adopted a Further NPRM on streamlining satellite and earth station applications (see 2309210055). There was a lack of consensus about shot clocks in initial comments last month (see 2401090051).
The FCC seeks the dismissal of the petition for review of Maurine and Matthew Molak to vacate the FCC’s Oct. 25 declaratory ruling authorizing funding for Wi-Fi service and equipment on school buses under the commission’s E-rate program (see 2312200040), according to the commission’s motion Tuesday (docket 23-60641) at the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
A state bill forcing privatization of a municipal broadband network in Frankfort, Kentucky, could debut shortly, Frankfort Plant Board (FPB) officials said in interviews. FPB is fighting the legislation, which is expected to be written by state Sen. Gex Williams (R). The bill, if and when it's introduced, would be part of a trend of industry attacks on muni broadband, said Gigi Sohn, American Association for Public Broadband (AAPB) executive director. Some argue private investment is superior to public broadband, while others believe certain conditions prevent making a true comparison between municipal and private networks. Still others think a municipal network is appropriate only in areas where private companies opt out.