Photo of Yaron Dori

Yaron Dori

Yaron Dori has over 25 years of experience advising technology, telecommunications, media, life sciences, and other types of companies on their most pressing business challenges. He is a former chair of the firm’s technology, communications and media practices and currently serves on the firm’s eight-person Management Committee.

Yaron’s practice advises clients on strategic planning, policy development, transactions, investigations and enforcement, and regulatory compliance.

Early in his career, Yaron advised telecommunications companies and investors on regulatory policy and frameworks that led to the development of broadband networks. When those networks became bidirectional and enabled companies to collect consumer data, he advised those companies on their data privacy and consumer protection obligations. Today, as new technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) are being used to enhance the applications and services offered by such companies, he advises them on associated legal and regulatory obligations and risks. It is this varied background – which tracks the evolution of the technology industry – that enables Yaron to provide clients with a holistic, 360-degree view of technology policy, regulation, compliance, and enforcement.

Yaron represents clients before federal regulatory agencies—including the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and the Department of Commerce (DOC)—and the U.S. Congress in connection with a range of issues under the Communications Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, and similar statutes. He also represents clients on state regulatory and enforcement matters, including those that pertain to telecommunications, data privacy, and consumer protection regulation. His deep experience in each of these areas enables him to advise clients on a wide range of technology regulations and key business issues in which these areas intersect.

With respect to technology and telecommunications matters, Yaron advises clients on a broad range of business, policy and consumer-facing issues, including:

Artificial Intelligence and the Internet of Things;
Broadband deployment and regulation;

IP-enabled applications, services and content;
Section 230 and digital safety considerations;
Equipment and device authorization procedures;
The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA);

Customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI) requirements;

The Cable Privacy Act
Net Neutrality; and
Local competition, universal service, and intercarrier compensation.

Yaron also has extensive experience in structuring transactions and securing regulatory approvals at both the federal and state levels for mergers, asset acquisitions and similar transactions involving large and small FCC and state communication licensees.

With respect to privacy and consumer protection matters, Yaron advises clients on a range of business, strategic, policy and compliance issues, including those that pertain to:

The FTC Act and related agency guidance and regulations;
State privacy laws, such as the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and California Privacy Rights Act, the Colorado Privacy Act, the Connecticut Data Privacy Act, the Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act, and the Utah Consumer Privacy Act;
The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA);
Location-based services that use WiFi, beacons or similar technologies;
Digital advertising practices, including native advertising and endorsements and testimonials; and

The application of federal and state telemarketing, commercial fax, and other consumer protection laws, such as the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), to voice, text, and video transmissions.

Yaron also has experience advising companies on congressional, FCC, FTC and state attorney general investigations into various consumer protection and communications matters, including those pertaining to social media influencers, digital disclosures, product discontinuance, and advertising claims.

On December 3, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) announced that it reached a settlement with IntelliVision Technologies Corp. (“IntelliVision”) to resolve allegations that the company violated Section 5 of the FTC Act by making certain claims concerning its AI-powered facial recognition software. 

The FTC’s complaint alleged, among other things, that IntelliVision made certain inaccurate or insufficiently supported claims about its facial recognition software, including with regard to its accuracy as it pertains to gender, race, and ethnicity detection and bias.

To resolve these and other allegations, the FTC and Intellivision entered into a proposed consent order that places restrictions and obligations on IntelliVision with respect to its facial recognition technology.

Among other restrictions, the proposed consent order requires that IntelliVision not make misrepresentations about the accuracy or efficacy of its technology, including concerning “the comparative performance … with respect to individuals of different genders, ethnicities, and skin tones, or reducing or eliminating differential performance based on such factors” and detecting spoofing or determining “Liveness” (defined to mean “that a living subject is present at the point of capture”).Continue Reading IntelliVision Settles FTC Allegations Regarding its Facial Recognition Technology

Last week, California’s telecommunications regulator, the California Public Utilities Commission (“CPUC”), adopted a new regulatory framework for providers of interconnected voice over Internet protocol (“iVoIP”) that marks a significant shift in regulation of a service that has long been lightly regulated both at the state and federal level.  Under the new rules adopted at Thursday’s CPUC meeting, iVoIP providers are now subject to registration and licensing requirements in California, which also will require that these companies notify the CPUC of – and in some cases, seek prior approval for – any transfers of control or assignments of their assets.

The new rules could have significant and far-reaching ramifications for carriers providing iVoIP services in the largest market in the United States.  For example, because the CPUC’s decision now requires at least some form of filing with the regulator before transfer of control of an iVoIP provider may occur, financial or strategic investors focused on the telecommunications space should take note that regulatory requirements may apply to any acquisition or investment in an iVoIP provider with operations in California.  In some circumstances, a transfer of control of a California iVoIP provider or assignment of iVoIP provider assets may require prior approval from the CPUC, a process that tends to be the lengthiest state regulatory approval process for communications transactions that require state review.

Substantively, the CPUC’s order concerns the creation of new utility classifications (and corresponding authorization types) for iVoIP providers, which are subject to different licensing or registration requirements depending on the nature of the iVoIP services they provide.  The following is a summary of the three new utility types and the key requirements for each from the CPUC’s order.

Continue Reading California PUC Adopts New Rules Implementing Sweeping Changes in Regulation of Interconnected VoIP Providers

On October 23, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) released a Notice of Inquiry (“NOI”) seeking comment on potential initiatives to address customer service concerns among regulated communications service providers. 

The FCC stated that the goal of the NOI is “to ensure that consumers have appropriate access to the customer services resources they require to interact with their service provider in a manner that allows them to efficiently resolve issues, avoid unnecessary charges, and make informed choices regarding the services they obtain from service providers.”  The inquiry is specific to regulated cable operators, Direct Broadcast Satellite providers, voice service providers, and broadband service providers (collectively referred to as “service providers”).Continue Reading FCC to Examine Customer Service Issues in the Communications Industry

On September 25, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that it brought five actions against companies it accused of using “artificial intelligence as a way to supercharge deceptive or unfair conduct that harms consumers.”  These actions, which the FTC indicated are part of its new enforcement sweep called “Operation AI Comply,” reflect the FTC’s repeatedly stated intention to exercise its authority under the FTC Act and other rules in connection with AI-related products and marketing claims. 

The five actions rely on a range of FTC authorities and target several different forms of conduct. 

  • DoNotPay: The FTC brought an action against DoNotPay, which purports to offer automated legal services, on the theory that it violated the FTC Act by making false claims that its product could substitute for the expertise of a human lawyer.  A proposed settlement would require DoNotPay to pay $193,000, provide notices to past subscribers, and avoid making claims about its ability to substitute AI for professional expertise without proper evidence.

Continue Reading FTC Announces New Enforcement Actions on Marketing of AI-Enabled Products

On September 26, 2024, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) issued a $6 million fine against political consultant Steve Kramer for “illegal robocalls made using deepfake, AI-generated voice cloning technology and caller ID spoofing to spread election misinformation to potential New Hampshire voters prior to the state’s January primary presidential election.”   The fine follows a $1

Continue Reading FCC Fines Political Consultant $6 Million for AI-based “Deepfake” Robocalls

On September 18, 2024, the Texas Office of the Attorney General (“OAG”) announced that it reached “a first-of-its-kind settlement with a Dallas-based artificial intelligence healthcare technology called Pieces Technologies” (“Pieces”) to resolve “allegations that the company deployed its products at several Texas hospitals after making a series of false and misleading statements about the accuracy and safety of its products.”

According to the press release, “at least four major Texas hospitals have been providing their patients’ healthcare data in real time to Pieces so that its generative AI product can ‘summarize’ patients’ condition and treatment for hospital staff.”  Pieces developed “a series of metrics to claim that its healthcare AI products were ‘highly accurate,’ including advertising and marketing the accuracy of its products and services by claiming an error rate or ‘severe hallucination rate’ of  ‘<1 per 100,000.’”  The OAG claimed that its “investigation found that these metrics were likely inaccurate and may have deceived hospitals about the accuracy and safety of the company’s products” in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.Continue Reading Healthcare Technology Company Settles Texas Attorney General Allegations Regarding Accuracy of Generative AI Products

Updated September 12, 2024. Originally posted August 7, 2024.

On Wednesday, August 7, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that would amend its rules under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) to incorporate new consent and disclosure requirements for the transmission of AI-generated calls and texts. The NPRM builds off the FCC’s recent Notice of Inquiry (NOI) on the effect of AI on illegal robocalls and texts, which we previously discussed here.

The NPRM seeks comment on new rules that would require a sender to clearly and conspicuously specify in its consent form that the consent extends to AI-generated calls and texts and secure the consumer’s consent for such calls and texts before they could be transmitted. The proposal also would require a sender of AI-generated content to, at the beginning of the call or text, clearly disclose to the called party that AI-generated technology is being used.Continue Reading FCC Proposes New Consent and Disclosure Rules for AI-Generated Calls and Texts

On Thursday, July 25, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing new requirements for radio and television broadcasters and certain other licensees that air political ads containing content created using artificial intelligence (AI).  The NPRM was approved on a 3-2 party-line vote and comes in the wake of an announcement made by FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel earlier this summer about the need for such requirements, which we discussed here

At the core of the NPRM are two proposed requirements.  First, parties subject to the rules would have to announce on-air that a political ad (whether a candidate-sponsored ad or an “issue ad” purchased by a political action committee) was created using AI.  Second, those parties would have to include a note in their online political files for political ads containing AI-generated content disclosing the use of such content.  Additional key features of the NPRM are described below.Continue Reading FCC Proposes Labeling and Disclosure Rules for AI-Generated Content in Political Ads

On June 10, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari in Consumers’ Research et al. v. Federal Communications Commission et al.  In its petition, the advocacy group Consumers’ Research, along with a small carrier and a five individuals, sought the Supreme Court’s review of the constitutionality of

Continue Reading U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Review Constitutional Challenges to Federal Universal Service Fund Program

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently adopted two Notices of Apparent Liability (NALs) in connection with its investigation into AI-based “deepfake” calls made to New Hampshire voters on January 21, 2024.  The NALs follow a cease-and-desist letter sent on February 6 to Lingo Telecom, LLC (Lingo), a voice service provider that originated the calls, demanding that it stop originating unlawful robocall traffic on its network, which we previously blogged about here.Continue Reading FCC Proposes Fines for AI-based “Deepfake” Robocalls Before New Hampshire Primary