CIPP/US Study Guide
Chapter 5: Federal and State Regulators and Enforcement of Privacy Law

Deceptive Trade Practices and Broken Privacy Promises

A deceptive practice is a material statement or omission likely to mislead reasonable consumers. Breaking a privacy-notice promise is deceptive under Section 5. The Facebook ($5B) and Everalbum (algorithmic disgorgement) cases illustrate enforcement.

By 2000 privacy notices were standard on commercial websites. If a company promised a level of privacy or security and failed to deliver, the FTC treated that broken promise as 'deceptive' under Section 5. A deceptive practice requires a material statement or omission likely to mislead reasonable consumers - including false promises, misrepresentations, and failures to honor representations in privacy notices.

Two deceptive-practice cases
CaseYearKey point
In the Matter of Facebook2019$5 billion fine for deceiving users about privacy control; violated a 2012 consent order; agreed to board-level privacy accountability - then the largest FTC privacy penalty
In the Matter of Everalbum2021Auto-enabled facial recognition (told users it was opt-in) and kept deactivated users' content; agreed to algorithmic disgorgement - deleting models built on improperly obtained data
Algorithmic disgorgement survives AMG

Because AMG limited equitable monetary relief under Section 13(b), the FTC can still seek non-monetary remedies like algorithmic disgorgement - an increasingly important tool, especially for AI, until courts say otherwise.

Key terms - quick answers

What is “Deceptive practice”?
A material statement or omission likely to mislead consumers acting reasonably under the circumstances - including failure to honor privacy-notice promises.
What is “Algorithmic disgorgement”?
A remedy requiring a company to delete algorithms or models built using improperly obtained data, used in the Everalbum settlement.