Privacy enforcement action where the FTC settled with General Motors and OnStar for collecting and selling consumers' geolocation and driving behavior data without adequate notice or consent. The order prohibits sharing data with consumer reporting agencies and requires transparency and consumer choice measures.
GM is banned from disclosing consumers' geolocation and driver behavior data to consumer reporting agencies for five years. For 20 years, GM must obtain affirmative consent before collecting or sharing connected vehicle data, provide data access and deletion options, allow disabling geolocation collection, and offer opt-out capabilities with limited exceptions.
In-house legal teams should review customer-facing agreements (e.g., vehicle purchase/lease agreements, OnStar subscription terms) and vendor/data sharing agreements to ensure they contain clear, unambiguous clauses regarding the collection, use, and sale of sensitive geolocation and driving behavior data. Specific clauses to scrutinize include those governing consumer consent (requiring affirmative, not implied, consent), third-party data sharing (especially prohibitions on sharing with consumer reporting agencies), data transparency obligations (disclosing what data is collected and for what purposes), and consumer choice mechanisms (opt-out rights). Agreements may need amendments to explicitly list geolocation and driver behavior data as sensitive, mandate separate consent for their sale, restrict sharing with consumer reporting agencies, and provide layered, conspicuous privacy notices.
Entity
General Motors LLC, General Motors Holdings LLC, and OnStar, LLC
Also known as: General Motors
Industry
AutomotiveOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2026/01/ftc-finalizes-order-settling-allegations-gm-onstar-collected-sold-geolocation-data-without-consumers
GMAdminOrderDec2025
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/GMAdminOrderDec2025.pdf
ftc takes action against general motors sharing drivers prec
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/01/ftc-takes-action-against-general-motors-sharing-drivers-precise-location-driving-behavior-data
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"General Motors LLC, General Motors Holdings LLC, and OnStar, LLC (collectively GM)"
"collected, used, and sold consumers’ precise geolocation data and driving behavior data from millions of vehicles without adequately notifying consumers and obtaining their affirmative consent."
The FTC referred a complaint against REPS & Company Inc. and company executives, alleging they bypassed ticket-issuer security controls and purchasing limits to acquire millions of tickets for resale. The complaint was filed by the Department of Justice, and the case will be decided by the court; the press release does not report a penalty or other remedy imposed.
The FTC sued Digital Forensics Corporation LLC and affiliated defendants, alleging they misled sextortion victims with promises of investigative and monitoring services that often were not provided, and used fake positive reviews. A federal court granted the FTC’s request to temporarily halt the defendants’ activities; the complaint remains for the court to decide.
The FTC alleged that Greenway Auto Group advertised vehicle prices thousands of dollars below the amounts consumers actually paid and used mailers falsely suggesting recipients had won cash prizes. Greenway agreed to an order requiring transparent pricing and prohibiting deceptive prize mailers and other misrepresentations; the press release does not state a monetary penalty.
The FTC sent warning letters to 24 large healthcare services companies, cautioning that incomplete, inaccurate, or untimely pricing information for scheduled medical care may be unfair or deceptive. The letters urge recipients to review their price-disclosure practices and take corrective action; they announce no fine or formal order.
$1.9M
The FTC alleged that Premier Franchising Group LLC and Franchise Fastlane LLC made deceptive and unsubstantiated claims about the Premier Martial Arts franchise opportunity and violated the Franchise Rule. The proposed settlements require the companies to pay a combined $1.85 million to compensate franchisees, prohibit certain misrepresentations, and require Franchise Rule compliance; certain franchisees may also cancel their agreements without penalty.
The FTC, Utah, and Nevada sued Lens.com Inc., alleging that it advertised artificially low contact lens prices while hiding mandatory checkout charges and misleading consumers about its AutoRefill subscription. The complaint seeks to stop the alleged practices; the court has not yet decided the case, and no penalty or remedy has been imposed.