Advertisement

May 21, 2013

FTC: Collecting and Selling Data Mined from Social Media Sites Covered by FCRA

On June 12, 2012, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a settlement with Spokeo, Inc., a data broker that compiles and sells detailed information profiles on consumers, in connection with claims that Spokeo violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and the FTC’s Endorsement Guidelines.  Spokeo will pay $800,000 in civil penalties and has entered into an order prohibiting it from violating certain FCRA provisions and misrepresenting the status of any user or endorser of its product or service.

Notably, this is the FTC’s first case to address the sale of information collected through the internet from social media for use in the employment screening context.  Not only is the FTC watching what social media companies are doing with users’ information, it is paying attention to how data brokers are using information collected through social media sites.  This case, while about the FCRA and Endorsement Guidelines specifically, echoes the enhanced scrutiny for data brokers (and large platform providers and mobile app developers) evident in the FTC’s March 2012 privacy report.

The FCRA was enacted to promote the accuracy, fairness and privacy of information maintained by consumer reporting agencies (sometimes incorrectly referred to as credit reporting agencies).  So-called “consumer reports” are broadly defined in the FCRA as information “bearing on a consumer's credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living which is used or expected to be used or collected in whole or in part for the purpose of serving as a factor in establishing the consumer’s eligibility for (a) credit or insurance . . .; (b) employment purposes; or (c) any other purpose authorized under [15 U.S.C. § 1681b].”  (Other purposes under § 604 of the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. § 1681b, include determining the consumer’s eligibility for a government license or other benefit, determining capacity to make child support payments, or some other “legitimate business need for the information,” among other similar uses.)

Spokeo collected information about individuals from online and offline sources to create profiles that included contact information, marital status and age range, and in some cases included a person’s hobbies, ethnicity, religion, participation on social networking sites and photos that Spokeo attributed to a particular individual.  Spokeo marketed these profiles to companies in the human resources, background screening and recruiting industries as information to serve as a factor in deciding whether to interview or hire a job candidate.  As such, Spokeo acted as a consumer reporting agency, and the FTC alleged that Spokeo violated the FCRA by (a) failing to ensure the consumer reports it sold were used for legally permissible purposes, (b) failing to ensure that the information it sold was accurate and (c) failing to inform users of Spokeo’s consumer reports of their obligations under the FCRA.

The complaint also alleges that Spokeo violated Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits “unfair or deceptive” trade practices, by directing its employees to post deceptive endorsements of its consumer reports as Spokeo customers (instead of disclosing that the endorsements were posted by Spokeo’s own employees).  The order requires that Spokeo remove (or request removal of) deceptive endorsements of its products, whether on its own website or third-party websites.

For additional information, the FTC’s press release and related documents can be found here.

© 2013 McDermott Will & Emery

About the Author

Partner

Jennifer S. Geetter is a partner in the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery LLP and is based in the Firm's Washington, D.C., office.  She focuses her practice on emerging biotechnology and safety issues, advising hospital, industry, insurance and provider clients on matters relating to research, drug and device development, off-label use, personalized medicine, formulary compliance, privacy and security, electronic health records and data strategy initiatives, patient safety, conflicts of interest, scientific review and research misconduct, internal hospital...

202 756 8205

About the Author

Partner

Heather Egan Sussman is a partner in the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery LLP and is based in the Firm’s Boston office.  She brings a practical, business-sense approach to solving workplace issues that helps clients efficiently and effectively manage every kind of HR and privacy-related risk.  Heather is Co-Chair of the Firm’s Global Data Privacy Affinity Group and a Certified Information Privacy Professional.

617-535-4177

Contributors

Associate

Carla A. R. Hine is an associate in the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery LLP and is based in the Firm's Washington, D.C., office.  She focuses her practice on antitrust and privacy regulatory matters.

202 756 8095

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.