The FTC finalized an order against data broker X-Mode and its successor Outlogic for selling precise location data that could track visits to sensitive locations like medical clinics and places of worship. The order bans them from sharing or selling sensitive location data and requires them to delete collected data, implement privacy programs, and ensure downstream compliance.
The order prohibits X-Mode/Outlogic from selling or sharing sensitive location data, requires deletion of previously collected location data unless consensual or deidentified, mandates creation of a sensitive locations list, implements a supplier assessment program, sets procedures for data recipients to avoid misuse, and establishes a comprehensive privacy program with a data retention schedule.
In-house legal teams should review all vendor, customer, and data processing agreements where location data is shared, sold, or processed. Focus on clauses governing data sharing, consent mechanisms (especially for sensitive locations like medical clinics or places of worship), data retention and deletion obligations, breach notification, and downstream use restrictions. Contracts may need amendments to explicitly prohibit the sale or sharing of sensitive location data, require deletion of previously collected location data, mandate the implementation of privacy programs, and include audit rights or indemnification to ensure downstream recipients comply with restrictions on sensitive location data.
Entity
X-Mode Social and Outlogic
Also known as: X-Mode
Industry
Data BrokerOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/04/ftc-finalizes-order-x-mode-successor-outlogic-prohibiting-it-sharing-or-selling-sensitive-location
X ModeSocialComplaint
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/X-ModeSocialComplaint.pdf
X ModeSocialDecisionandOrder
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/X-ModeSocialDecisionandOrder.pdf
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"X-Mode and its successor Outlogic"
"sold precise location data that could be used to track people’s visits to sensitive locations such as medical and reproductive health clinics and places of worship."
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.