State attorneys general ask FCC to clarify TCPA requirements for AI calls

Hogan Lovells
Contact

Hogan Lovells

The Federal Communications Commissions (FCC) published a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) last fall about the implications of emerging artificial intelligence technologies on the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and related FCC rules.  Attorneys general from 26 states (State AGs) submitted a joint comment asking the FCC to clarify that the TCPA’s prohibition on artificial voice calls or messages applies to AI-generated human voices.


The NOI is one of several current efforts at the FCC to assess the impact of emerging AI technologies. The NOI’s questions address a broad range of issues, including the definition of AI for TCPA purposes, the benefits and risks of current and future AI technologies used for robocalls and texts, the scope of the FCC’s authority, and future areas of regulatory inquiry.

The State AGs call attention to two questions in the NOI regarding voices generated by AI technology. First, the NOI asks whether it would “be helpful to define AI technologies in a more specific way to take into consideration the potential ability of AI technologies to function as the equivalent to a live agent when interacting with consumers.” Second, the NOI asks “whether AI technology can minimize the nuisances associated with the use of artificial or prerecorded voice messages by acting as the functional equivalent to calls with live agents.”

In their letter, the State AGs urge the FCC to clarify that “any type of AI technology that generates a human voice should be considered an ‘artificial voice’ under the TCPA and that callers using these technologies are bound by TCPA requirements for prior express written consent.”

The FCC notes in the NOI that the TCPA’s “existing prohibition on ‘artificial‘ voice messages encompasses current AI technologies that generate human voices.” Citing its “soundboard technologies” Declaratory Ruling and Order, the FCC suggests that the relevant question going forward may be “whether the technology at issue performed in the same manner as a live agent in interacting with consumers.”

[View source.]

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Hogan Lovells | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Hogan Lovells
Contact
more
less

Hogan Lovells on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide