Robocalls with AI voices to be regulated under Telephone Consumer Protection Act, the agency says. I’m pretty sure this puts us on the timeline where we eventually get incredible, futuristic tech, but computers and robots still sound mechanical and fake.

  • lewdian69@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    118
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    How does this get enforced though? They don’t even enforce their no call list or cut down on junk robo calls as it is.

    • linearchaos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      66
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Don’t undersell the FCC’s rules around robocalling. No, we’re still getting robocalls out the ass, but when it comes from US locations companies get their asses handed to them. The FCC is also the entity that’s pushing the telcos to Make it possible to stop it from overseas sources. The new laws that went in place this year f***** up my twilio automation that was sending me SMS messages on server failures. All of a sudden I have a bunch of paperwork to fill out and a waiting list to be able to send an SMS via API.

      If the FCC wasn’t impeding robocalls as much as it is phones would be useless by now.

        • Kalothar@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Man some of these are funny, bold and ironic

          `` The FCC described the other 12 companies’ attached “robocall mitigation plans” as follows:

          Humbolt VoIP: “The robocall mitigation plan attached to its certification was a .PNG file depicting an indiscernible object.” National Cloud Communications: “The robocall mitigation plan attached to its certification was a document titled ‘Windows Printer Test Page’ that was unrelated to robocall mitigation.” Route 66 Broadband: “The robocall mitigation plan attached to its certification consisted of a signed declaration by the Company’s CEO presented without additional content or context.” Tech Bizz Solutions: “The robocall mitigation plan attached to its certification contained a letter, unrelated to robocall mitigation, from Harvard Business Services, Inc.” 2054235 Alberta: “The robocall mitigation plan attached to its certification contained only the company’s business address.” Evernex: “The robocall mitigation plan attached to its certification was a .PNG file that depicted the filer’s ‘Taxpayer Profile’ on a Pakistani government website.” My Taxi Ride: “The robocall mitigation plan attached to its certification was a copy of an FCC public notice titled ‘FCC Facilitates Review of Restoring Internet Freedom Record.’” (Restoring Internet Freedom was the title of the FCC’s 2017 net neutrality repeal.) Nervill: The “attachment provided was a signature page on company letterhead with no substantive content or context.” SIA Tet: “The robocall mitigation plan attached to its certification was a letter that stated: ‘Unfortunately, we do not have such a documents.’” Textodog: “The robocall mitigation plan attached to its certification was a .PNG file that depicted a corporate icon.” USA-Connect.net: “The robocall mitigation plan attached to its certification contained only a signature.” Viettel Business Solutions: “The robocall mitigation plan attached to its certification was a promotional document titled ‘Viettel Solutions: Making Smart Cities Vision a Reality.’”

          ``

      • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        For the past 2 weeks I have been getting calls from a company claiming to register companies for voice search optimization. I’ve repeatedly told them to stop calling me, to which they respond that the calls won’t relent until I sign up with their service. I’ve been threatened, mocked, and just straight hung up on, so now I enjoy just waisting as much of their time as possible. I filed a complaint last week, so I’m just logging all their calls to increase the inevitable fine (they’re US based, all of the agents are clearly American).

        • linearchaos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          tell them you’re interested, keep them on the line for as much time as possible, waste them every time. that becomes expensive for them at a point.

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        I feel like most of the decent filtering of these types of calls are happening at the carrier level at this point. At least in my experience. They’ve been getting better at filtering them out before your phone even rings…

        But I’m not sure that’s how it should be. This is why regulatory agencies exist in the first place. What’s the point if there is zero enforcement?

    • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Most robo calls are not illegal as long as you follow the rules the FTC laid down.

      This would have ban AI generated voices, so regardless of the content of the robo call, if it used in AI voice it would be illegal.

      • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Not really? You don’t allow companies who don’t operate in the USA to have USA based numbers. And don’t allow them to spoof numbers. This way people can actually block international calls if they don’t want them and it’s clear from the get-go that it’s not Microsoft or your state representative calling you from India.

        • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Not allowing spoofed numbers would be a great improvement that I wish our government (or it agencies) would do

          That would do a lot to stop these kinds of calls

          • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            9 months ago

            They could even allow “Aliased” numbers… eg, a company has 10 numbers, and all outgoing come from the “main” number… But that should be specifically registered and validated by phone carriers as a thing rather than just showing the spoofed CID that we get these days. that way if the number generates complaints, the government can simply look at the registered alias and punish the correct people.

            • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              That’s a great idea

              In practice it prevents any rando from using a spoofed number and still allows corporations to have their internal phone lines behind a layer of obscurity

      • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        But how stupid would you have to be to take a call from half way around the world and listen to their advice about the upcoming election? A phone call that claims to come from a local politician is a lot more believable if it comes from a local number.

        • Nina@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          They spoof numbers. It almost always is a number from my state or the area code, very rarely do I get calls from out of state and they are all already labeled “spam risk/telemarketer” when they come in.

          Also thank you for writing this comment, I was going to say ios had no way to block unknown numbers, but I searched to double check myself and they finally do have that option! It may have been around for quite awhile, I hadn’t checked for a long while.

    • Nobody@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Exactly. Laws have no meaning if you don’t enforce them or enforce them selectively.

  • kromem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    It seems like most people are missing “under existing law”

    Nothing is changing. The FCC is simply putting to a vote clarifying that “yes, the prohibitions regarding automated calling apply to AI generated voices too.”

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    OK. Enforce it then.

    Block all calls unless you can verify exactly who they’re from. Block all overseas VOIP bullshit. Block calls from any country that doesn’t have the same call verification rules.

    • droans@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Blame the Republicans in Congress.

      It took until last May for the Senate to finally confirm the fifth Commissioner. Per law, they can’t create new rules or regulations when there’s a vacancy.

      Have you noticed that 5G was getting faster and had more coverage until it more or less stopped last year? For the first time in history, Congress did not renew the FCC’s spectrum auction authority. T-Mobile bought a lot of 2.5Ghz spectrum back in 2022 but the FCC couldn’t grant it to them. It wasn’t until a month and a half ago that they could use it… Because Congress passed a bill that granted the authority for auctions held prior to March 2023.

      They’ve also tried going after the VOIP services that don’t follow STIR/SHAKEN or allow robocallers. But they don’t have enough funding to do much more than the minimum. For the very few that they can catch, they first provide a warning period for the company to remove robocallers and correct their systems. If that fails, the FCC then permits carriers to block the provider, but they can’t mandate it.

      Except even that’s not enough. The FCC can’t take actual legal action against the providers, only the robocallers. So quite often, the provider will just change their business name, list different fake people as their executives, and then rejoin the networks as if nothing ever happened. Look up One Owl Telecom - they’ve done this numerous times.

    • ____@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Seems you could do all of that easily enough with asterisk or any of its variants/frontends. Bonus, you can tweak the rules as you like, on the fly.

      For awhile I was getting obv scam calls from china - I neither know anyone there nor do business of any kind there. That country code would be one of the first on my blacklist.

  • schnapsman@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    9 months ago

    If they banned all robocalling, wouldn’t that solve it? Can a prioritisation of quality of life over marketing include the phone space? Four US states ban billboards. With an ad blocker, the internet is usable. Nitpicking which tactics can be used in robocalls won’t hardly solve the vicious spread of misinformation in this way.

    • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      banned all robocalling

      Oh, I didn’t realize this was literally Nazi Germany.

      A slippery slope where the next thing you know, corporations aren’t people, they’re capping the unlimited anonymous campaign contributions, and ad-supported Neuralink requires informed consent.

    • Timwi@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I assume that banning all robocalls requires new legislation, whereas the regulation mentioned here didn’t.

    • dirthawker0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      Robocalling isn’t inherently bad. Utilities and such institutions that have your membership (library, gym, health care etc) should be welcome to use robocalling to notify you of useful info like emergencies or changes to their schedules. It’s just the political ads, scams, and sales that need to be made illegal and punishable.

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        The thing is, at this point, I’ve been so conditioned to ignore those kinds of calls, and immediately hang up if I accidentally pick one up, that I would probably miss the legitimate calls as well.

      • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Since we have mail and text messages, robo alli g shlould be outlawed by Geneva Convention.

  • YeetPics@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    How about this: if I get a robocall advertising a product/service or a politician’s campaign I get that product or service for FREE and if it’s for a politician they lose $25k from their pac or Superfund for each report (which gets donated to their opponent)?

    • mPony@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      yeah then you’ll have even more GOC money funding fake “Democratic Party” robocalls.

      • YeetPics@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Yea except if we have a publishable reporting system (for robocalls, like the ones you’re making up rn) it won’t work like that will it? Being that the concept changes the status quo… This isn’t super difficult to figure out if you try ;)

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    9 months ago

    Scammers who are just recording their voice: “Oh ok we’re good”

    • Laitinlok@lemmy.laitinlok.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      The TCPA, a 1991 US law, bans the use of artificial or prerecorded voices in most non-emergency calls “without the prior express consent of the called party.”

      Prerecorded calls are not allowed too.

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Right, so in other words this will change absolutely nothing just like that 1991 law did.

    • spongebue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      I accidentally deleted that voice mail from the public benefits department a couple days ago and they haven’t called back yet ☹️

  • nutsack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    didn’t this happen a long time ago under Bill Clinton or something? what the fuck happened?

  • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    9 months ago

    Wow this is interesting, I didn’t know there were existing limits on using prerecorded and generic (non-impersonating) robot calls. Including from campaigns but they have certain special limits.

    I wonder if the CRTC has similar rules in Canada.

  • Herbal Gamer@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    9 months ago

    This has made me wonder… have any other europeans ever had problems with these?

    I don’t recall ever having been called by a robot.

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      One of the reasons might be that a) robo calls are illegal here, and b) if someone uses them, they are easy to hunt down.

      I once got some robocalls, all of the same makeup telling me I had won a car and should call a premium number to claim it (Ha!). I just reported those numbers to the local equivalent of the FCC, and they took it down within days.

    • Nyfure@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      We sometimes get weird scam-sms, but thats about it.
      (We is my family, other people dont really talk about it with others that much)

  • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Does this include google assistant making robocalls or answering my phone on my behalf? I sometimes use it to setup hair cut appointments.

    • Spinny@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      Wait you can use Google Assistant to make calls? I just use it to filter out spam calls without answering.