Standards and Regulation: US FTC
Standards and Regulation · US FTC. Formal AI rules, business guidance and enforcement documents. This source has 4 entries admitted under this category's review policy; each links directly to the original.
Authority tiers in this category: A1.
FTC rule on impersonation of government and businesses
Prohibits impersonating governments, businesses or their officials or agents in commerce, giving a direct enforcement basis against AI-driven impersonation fraud.
Evidence use: Supports the rule text, who it applies to and whether it is in force; AI is only one possible means.
Limitations: Not a general rule for all AI systems. Whether conduct is unlawful depends on the specific conduct and judicial facts.
Related concepts: AI-generated Content Detection and Watermarking · AI Governance and Regulation
Link last checked: 2026-09-24
Final order in the Rite Aid facial recognition enforcement case
The final order against Rite Aid over misidentification, consumer harm and missing safeguards caused by facial recognition.
Evidence use: Supports the allegations, order obligations and FTC enforcement facts on biometric AI risk in this case.
Limitations: The order binds only the parties to the case. Cannot be generalized into a uniform rule for all companies.
Related concepts: Bias and Fairness · Privacy and Data Compliance · AI Governance and Regulation
Link last checked: 2026-09-24
Final order in the DoNotPay "AI lawyer" advertising enforcement case
The final order over advertising that claimed an AI service could replace human lawyers without adequate testing.
Evidence use: Supports the AI capability claims, testing basis and consumer protection obligations in this case.
Limitations: Applies only to the parties and the specific representations. Not a general licensing rule for legal-services AI.
Related concepts: Model Evaluation and Benchmarks · AI Governance and Regulation
Link last checked: 2026-09-24
Final order in the MindSift "active listening" AI marketing enforcement case
The final decision and order over a so-called AI "active listening" advertising service and false claims that consumers had consented.
Evidence use: Supports the final order, settlement facts and the limits on AI marketing claims in this case.
Limitations: The case page status may still reflect administrative process, but the timeline shows the final order has been issued. The order applies only to the parties.
Related concepts: Privacy and Data Compliance · AI Governance and Regulation
Link last checked: 2026-09-24