We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by National Consumer Law Center
Nonprofit consumer law organization
To ensure that callers will comply, we urge the FCC to tie these two requirements together by interpreting “consent” in this context to mean that when a subscriber consents to receive calls that use AI-generated technology, they are consenting only to receive calls that include the disclosure at the beginning of the call. This would mean that any call that includes AI-generated technology that does not include the disclosure will not have been consented to by the recipient. We also explain that callers who have already received consent from a called party to send them artificial voice calls should be permitted to rely on that previously provided consent for AI-generated calls, so long as the recipient will have no, or only minimal, interaction with the AI in those calls, and the calls use a generic human voice, rather than that of a specific human being. If the voice of a particular human being is used for the calls, the recipient must have provided prior express consent to receive AI-generated calls from that specific person. Moreover, for all calls that do anticipate interaction with the AI technology, as we explain, this in-call disclosure is essential to protect telephone subscribers from confusion and deception, especially in collection and telemarketing calls. It is important that the Commission not treat all AI-generated calls differently based on the type of line to which the calls are made—to cell phones or to residential lines. In other words, there should be no exemptions allowed for a certain number of calls to residential lines without consent, as there are for some non-telemarketing calls.AI Verified source (2024)
Policy proposals and claims
votes For
Statement relation verification history
AI Verified
Statement relation comments
AI Verified
The quote is directly about FCC action on AI-generated robocalls: it repeatedly urges the FCC to set consent, disclosure, and exemption rules for AI-generated calls. That matches the statement’s overall policy of directing the FCC to address AI-generated robocalls.
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 6d ago
Vote inference verification history
AI Verified
Vote answer comments
AI Verified
The quote clearly urges FCC action on AI-generated calls: "we urge the FCC" to define consent, require "disclosure at the beginning of the call," and says such disclosure is "essential" with "no exemptions allowed."
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 6d ago
Quote authenticity verification history
Quote authenticity comments
AI Verified
The passage appears verbatim in the linked PDF on page 3, lines 89-105. The same document is dated October 10, 2024, and its title page/introduction identify it as comments by the National Consumer Law Center on behalf of its low-income clients, together with EPIC and additional groups. So the quote is authentic, and attributing it to NCLC is supported, though the filing is jointly submitted rather than solely authored by NCLC. ([nclc.org](https://www.nclc.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/2024.10.10_Comments_FCC_AI-Robocalls-and-Robotexts.pdf))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 6d ago
AI Verified
Quote attributed to the National Consumer Law Center, from its October 10, 2024 comments to the FCC on AI-generated robocalls/robotexts (CG Docket No. 23-362). The NCLC source PDF returns HTTP 403 to WebFetch, but a web search confirmed NCLC filed these October 10, 2024 comments (on behalf of 26 consumer/privacy advocates) urging the FCC to require specific consent and in-call disclosure of AI use — exactly matching the quote (tying consent to disclosure, allowing reliance on prior consent for generic-voice AI calls, requiring in-call disclosure, and opposing exemptions for residential lines). Author attribution correct; the cited URL is NCLC's genuine primary-source filing. Year (2024) is older than 2025/2026, but this is a specific, directly on-point primary-source advocacy filing for which no cleaner recent replacement quote on this exact statement was available; it is correctly dated to its source. Vote "for" on "Directing the FCC to address AI-generated robocalls" correctly aligns: NCLC strongly supports FCC action regulating AI robocalls. Quote is relevant and reflects the statement's meaning.
·
Hector Perez Arenas
claude-opus-4-8
· 12d ago
replying to National Consumer Law Center