The FTC settled charges that Rite Aid deployed AI facial recognition technology in hundreds of stores from 2012 to 2020 without reasonable safeguards, resulting in false-positive matches that disproportionately harmed women and people of color. The proposed order bans Rite Aid from using facial recognition for surveillance for five years and requires comprehensive biometric data safeguards, data deletion, consumer notifications, and a certified security program.
Rite Aid is banned from using facial recognition for surveillance for five years, must delete all collected biometric images and derived algorithms, provide clear notice to consumers about its use, notify consumers when actions are taken based on the system, implement a comprehensive data security program overseen by executives, obtain independent third-party security assessments, and provide annual CEO certifications.
In-house legal teams should review all vendor agreements (especially with technology/AI providers), customer privacy policies, and any data processing agreements where biometric data or automated surveillance is involved. Specific clauses to scrutinize include: data processing specifications (particularly for biometric identifiers), consent mechanisms for surveillance, data retention and deletion schedules, breach notification protocols, audit rights, and representations/warranties regarding algorithmic fairness and accuracy. Given the FTC's order, contracts may need amendments to: (1) explicitly prohibit or restrict AI facial recognition for surveillance purposes, (2) mandate regular disparate impact assessments for automated systems, (3) require robust data minimization and deletion protocols for biometric data, (4) establish certified security programs aligned with FTC expectations, and (5) incorporate consumer notification requirements for false positives or data misuse. Teams should also assess termination rights if a vendor's technology poses uncorrectable consumer risks.
Entity
Rite Aid
Industry
RetailOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/12/rite-aid-banned-using-ai-facial-recognition-after-ftc-says-retailer-deployed-technology-without
2023190 riteaid stipulated order filed
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/2023190_riteaid_stipulated_order_filed.pdf
2023190 riteaid complaint filed
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/2023190_riteaid_complaint_filed.pdf
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"Rite Aid will be prohibited from using facial recognition technology for surveillance purposes for five years to settle Federal Trade Commission charges"
"the retailer failed to implement reasonable procedures and prevent harm to consumers in its use of facial recognition technology"
"facial recognition technology falsely flagged the consumers as matching someone who had previously been identified as a shoplifter"
"Rite Aid’s facial recognition technology was more likely to generate false positives in stores located in plurality-Black and Asian communities than in plurality-White communities"
"Rite Aid will be prohibited from using facial recognition technology for surveillance purposes for five years"
"Delete, and direct third parties to delete, any images or photos they collected because of Rite Aid’s facial recognition system"
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.
The FTC issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking seeking public comment on whether ad-optimization tools offered by online platforms may help scammers impersonate businesses and government agencies. This is a proposed regulatory inquiry, not an enforcement action against a named company; no penalty or remedy was imposed.
$2.5B
A federal court approved a revised order in the FTC's Amazon Prime case under which Amazon will accelerate and expand redress payments under the September 2025 $2.5 billion settlement, which resolved allegations that Amazon enrolled millions of consumers in Prime subscriptions without their consent and knowingly made cancellation difficult. More consumers now qualify for refunds, the maximum payment cap rises from $51 to $200, and all future payments will be distributed automatically starting October 1, 2026, with potential supplemental $149 payments by April 2027. Amazon has already issued more than $845 million in redress payments as of September 2026.
$225.0M
The FTC and the state of Washington filed a joint complaint and proposed stipulated order requiring Amway Corp. and two affiliates—World Wide Group, L.L.C. (WWG) and Leadership Team Development Inc. (LTD)—to pay a $225 million judgment, the largest monetary recovery ever obtained from an MLM in an FTC action, over allegations that they used deceptive earnings claims and unfair tactics to recruit Independent Business Owners. The complaint alleges the companies falsely promised substantial income and recruitment success, pressured IBOs to buy products they could not resell, and instructed IBOs to falsely report sales. Nearly all of the judgment will be used as redress for IBOs who lost money, and the proposed order imposes structural reforms including a 70% resale requirement, independent audits of sales records, and a ban on approved providers charging new IBOs for first-year training.
$100.0M
FleetCor Technologies Inc. (now Corpay Inc.) and its CEO Ronald Clarke agreed to pay $100 million to settle an FTC administrative action alleging the company charged small business customers hidden and unauthorized fees for fuel cards and misrepresented gas savings, fraud-control features, and fees. A federal district court granted the FTC summary judgment on all counts in 2023, and a federal appeals court upheld that judgment and the permanent injunction in 2026. The settlement funds will be used to provide redress to harmed business customers.
FTC staff published FAQs on price transparency to help the automobile industry comply with the FTC Act, reiterating that an advertised vehicle price must be the actual price any consumer can pay, excluding only government-required charges. The guidance follows warning letters the FTC sent to 97 auto dealership groups earlier in 2026 and signals continued litigation against dealers that advertise one price but charge more through undisclosed fees. No specific entity was charged and no penalty was imposed.