Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupport
Contact Us
Search
Close

FTC Updates (December 22 – 26, 2025)

By Joanna Rosen Forster & Nicholas Pung on January 6, 2026
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Federal Trade Commission
The building of the Federal Trade Commission in downtown Washington DC.

As we approach the end of the year, the FTC has been active in the consumer protection arena, reopening and setting aside a consent order due to President Trump’s AI Executive Order, analyzing consumer losses to rental scams, and warning companies about possible violations of the new Consumer Review Rule. More on these stories after the jump.

Monday, December 22, 2025

Bureau of Consumer Protection: Technology; Advertising and Marketing; Endorsements, Influencers, and Reviews; Artificial Intelligence

  • The FTC issued an order to reopen and set aside a 2024 final consent order with Rytr LLC consistent with the Trump Administration’s Artificial Intelligence Executive Order and America’s AI Action Plan. The 2024 final consent order against Rytr settled allegations the FTC had outlined in its 2024 complaint that Rytr’s artificial intelligence-enabled writing assistance service had allowed subscribers to generate false and deceptive online reviews in violation of the FTC Act. The final consent order, among other conditions, banned Rytr from providing any AI-enabled service generating consumer or customer reviews or testimonials. Following the issuance of President Trump’s Executive Order on AI, the Commission reviewed the case and determined that the complaint failed to satisfy the legal requirements of the FTC Act and that the order unduly burdens AI innovation. The FTC press release states that after reviewing the final order in response to President Trump’s AI Action Plan, the FTC found that the facts alleged in the complaint failed to support allegations that Rytr violated Section 5 of the FTC Act and that, “because the order unduly burdens innovation in the nascent AI industry, it is in the public interest to set it aside.” The Commission vote to issue the order reopening and setting aside the final decision and order was 2-0.

Bureau of Consumer Protection: Housing; Advertising and Marketing

  • The FTC released an analysis, as part of its Consumer Protection Data Spotlight, finding that consumers have lost millions of dollars to rental scams, underscoring a significant and growing threat in the housing market. The FTC’s data reveals that fraudsters frequently exploit rental listings to deceive renters into paying deposits or rent for properties that do not exist or are not legitimately available. These scams have intensified with the increased reliance on online platforms for property searches. The scams take different forms, including pressuring consumers to pay money upfront before seeing the property in person, pushing consumers to provide screenshots of their credit score, sending consumers links to sign up for a credit check but that actually enroll the consumer in a paid membership, or collecting personal information from consumers such as their social security number. The FTC encourages consumers to search for the rental property to verify the price and contact information, avoid sharing personal information until there is an agreement to rent a property, and check out typical rents. For clients involved in real estate or property management, this report highlights the importance of robust fraud prevention measures and consumer education to mitigate financial losses and avoid legal liabilities related to deceptive rental practices.

Bureau of Consumer Protection: Consumer Review Rule; Advertising and Marketing; Endorsements, Influencers, and Reviews

  • The FTC has issued warning letters to 10 companies regarding potential violations of its new Consumer Review Rule, which bans deceptive or unfair practices concerning the use of product reviews in advertising and marketing. The Rule forbids reviews or testimonials that falsely depict a reviewer’s experience, whether positive or negative, or falsely claim that the reviewer has used the product or service. Additionally, businesses cannot tie employee compensation or incentives to the expression of a specific opinion, positive or negative, and employees must disclose when reviews are authored by employees or their immediate family members. The Rule also includes provisions about websites controlled by companies for reviews, the suppression of certain reviews, and the improper use of social media metrics like follower counts or view numbers. Though the letters are not formal determinations, they were based on consumer complaints and warn the companies that Rule violations can result in the filing of a federal lawsuit or other legal action, as well as civil penalties of up to $53,088 per violation. For more information, see Crowell & Moring’s client alert, Keeping it Real: FTC Targets Fake Reviews in First Consumer Review Rule.
Tags: AI
Photo of Joanna Rosen Forster Joanna Rosen Forster

Joanna Forster’s multifaceted background positions her to effectively manage conflicts across the legal spectrum and across the globe. In her prior roles as general counsel (representing both plaintiffs and defendants) and as government prosecutor/enforcer, Joanna handled nearly every type of matter, ranging from

…

Joanna Forster’s multifaceted background positions her to effectively manage conflicts across the legal spectrum and across the globe. In her prior roles as general counsel (representing both plaintiffs and defendants) and as government prosecutor/enforcer, Joanna handled nearly every type of matter, ranging from complex commercial and white collar matters in areas such as employment, intellectual property, securities and antitrust law, to internal investigations and corporate and M&A transactions. She views her role as both a conflict manager, dispensing advice to avoid adversarial action, and as a tech and business litigator, resolving disputes with her client’s business goals in mind.

Having served as the general counsel and compliance officer of a publicly traded ecommerce platform operating in over 60 countries, Joanna has an appreciation of strategic dispute resolution, investigations, and compliance from a general counsel’s perspective. By understanding how business leaders combine the input of in-house and outside counsel to make decisions, Joanna is able to provide her clients with decisive and efficient legal guidance.

Her practice includes litigating domestic and cross-border complex commercial disputes and advising technology and ecommerce companies on matters related to internet platforms, product launches, market campaigns, and new vertical lines of business, all while advising on foreign and domestic laws that regulate online content, physical products, and the companies that bring them to market. Drawing on her experience as the General Counsel of an online e-commerce marketplace, Joanna also regularly advises and counsels clients on California’s Proposition 65, from prevention and compliance to remediation. Joanna is well-versed in key regulations that impact ecommerce companies, including the EU’s Digital Services Act, the U.S. INFORM Act, and the proposed SHOP SAFE Act, as well as laws and regulations that govern online speech such as the Communications Decency Act, Section 230.

Prior to going in-house, Joanna was the deputy attorney general, Corporate Fraud Section of the California Department of Justice. In this capacity, she led large, complex civil matters alleging violations of California’s False Claims Act, Securities Law, Section 17200, Cartwright Act, and other deceptive business practices. She also maintained her own investigations and litigation docket.

Before joining the California Department of Justice, Joanna spent nearly a decade in private practice, where she focused on civil and criminal antitrust and commercial litigation. She also served as a law clerk for the Honorable Consuelo B. Marshall in the U.S. District Court for the Central District Court of California.

Read more about Joanna Rosen ForsterEmailJoanna's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
Photo of Nicholas Pung Nicholas Pung
Read more about Nicholas PungEmailNicholas's Linkedin Profile
  • Posted in:
    Technology and AI
  • Blog:
    Retail & Consumer Products Law Observer
  • Organization:
    Crowell & Moring LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo