Penalty Amount
$5,800,000
Consumers Affected
55,000
The FTC charged Ring LLC with allowing employees to access private customer videos without consent and failing to secure user accounts, leading to hackers controlling cameras. Under a proposed consent order, Ring must pay $5.8 million in refunds, delete unlawfully accessed data, and implement a privacy and security program.
Ring must pay $5.8 million for consumer refunds, delete all customer videos and derived data from before 2018, implement a privacy and security program with safeguards on human video review and multi-factor authentication, report unauthorized access incidents to the FTC, notify consumers about the action, and is prohibited from profiting from unlawfully accessed videos.
In-house legal teams should review all vendor, customer, and data processing agreements involving Ring or similar IoT/security camera providers. Focus on clauses governing data access rights (especially employee/contractor access), security obligations (encryption, authentication), audit rights, data retention/deletion, and breach notification. Required changes may include: adding mandatory multi-factor authentication for all account access, restricting human video review to legitimate business purposes with audit logs, requiring prompt deletion of unlawfully accessed data, implementing data minimization principles, and ensuring refund mechanisms for harmed consumers. Employee agreements should also be updated to reflect new privacy safeguards.
Entity
Ring LLC
Also known as: Ring
Industry
TechnologyOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/05/ftc-says-ring-employees-illegally-surveilled-customers-failed-stop-hackers-taking-control-users
proposed stipulated order ring
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/proposed_stipulated_order_ring.pdf
complaint ring
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/complaint_ring.pdf
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"Ring LLC"
"$5.8 million"
"allowing any employee or contractor to access consumers’ private videos and by failing to implement basic privacy and security protections, enabling hackers to take control of consumers’ accounts, cameras, and videos."
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.