FCC Holding of Vicarious Liability under TCPA Stands

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

1133088_37104173On May 9, 2013, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) issued a declaratory ruling which found that Dish Network, LLC may be held vicariously liable for a third-party marketer’s violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (“TCPA”).  Last year we told you that the FCC ruled that sellers “may be held vicariously liable” for the actions of their third-party telemarketers if an agency relationship exists. (See FCC Issues New TCPA Ruling on Telemarketing Liability).  Dish Network then appealed this declaratory ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.  In late January of this year, the Court refused to take up the issue, citing jurisdictional concerns.  Although language in the Court’s decision suggests that the FCC’s ruling is not entitled to deference by the courts, the FCC’s decision may nonetheless still be used by courts.  Accordingly, the FCC’s decision on TCPA vicarious liability remains intact and, as such, marketers must be especially cautious moving forward.

Vicarious Liability under the TCPA

In two prior federal actions, the plaintiffs alleged that the underlying sellers were liable for TCPA violations engaged in by their third-party telemarketers.  The sellers countered that they did not “initiate” the subject calls as defined under the TCPA because the third-party telemarketing contractors were the actual initiators of the calls, and thus the sellers should not be held liable.

Before ruling on the TCPA claims, the courts in each case asked the FCC for a declaratory ruling on the potential liability of the seller.  The FCC subsequently held that, while the sellers did not “initiate” the calls as contemplated under the TCPA, they could be held liable where there is an “agency relationship.”

The District of Columbia Appellate Court Decision

Dish Network petitioned the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to review the FCC’s decision concerning vicarious liability.  The Court noted that its jurisdiction is limited to review only “final orders” of the FCC.  The Court determined that the FCC’s declaratory ruling on vicarious liability under the TCPA is not “final” because the decision has no binding effect on the courts and is not entitled to deference under federal law.  During the appeal, the FCC itself argued that the declaratory ruling is persuasive only, and not binding on any courts.  Accordingly, Dish Network’s appeal was dismissed.

Protect Yourself

It is unlikely that any federal court will overturn the FCC’s declaratory ruling on vicarious liability, and although not binding, the ruling may be relied on by courts deciding liability in cases brought under the TCPA.  Sellers should therefore take care to begin relationships with telemarketers through well-crafted agreements that seek to prevent the establishment of an agency relationship, using guidance provided by the FCC.

If you are interested in learning more about this topic, or if you have been served with legal process relating to the TCPA, please e-mail us at info@kleinmoynihan.com or call us at (212) 246-0900.

The material contained herein is provided for informational purposes only and is not legal advice, nor is it a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney.  Each situation is unique, and you should not act or rely on any information contained herein without seeking the advice of an experienced attorney.

Attorney Advertising

David O. Klein

David O. Klein

David Klein is one of the most recognized attorneys in the telemarketing, technology, Internet marketing, sweepstakes and telecommunications fields. Skilled at counseling clients on a broad range of technology-related matters, David Klein has substantial experience in negotiating and drafting complex licensing, marketing and Internet agreements.

Schedule a Call
In The Know

Trending Topics

New York Sweepstakes Law blog- Klein Moynihan Turco

New York Sweepstakes Law: Are You Compliant?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

In general, a lottery exists when entrants pay for the chance to win a prize. States alone reserve the right to administer lotteries. Businesses can eliminate one element of what would otherwise be an illegal lottery, in order to transform it into a legal promotional game. If the requirement to

TCPA surveys

An Ad or not an Ad: NY Weighs in on TCPA Surveys

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Another day, another court decision that refines constitutes a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) unsolicited fax advertisement. A Manhattan-based federal court recently issued a decision that removes faxed invitations to participate in a survey from the TCPA definition of advertisement. In drawing this distinction for TCPA surveys, the Court held

NY sports gambling law- Klein Moynihan Turco

Agreement Reached to Enact NY Sports Gambling Law

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

This week, Governor Andrew Cuomo and the New York State Legislature agreed to a budget deal that will bring mobile sports betting to the State through a unique NY sports gambling law.  Upon the Governor’s signature, NY sports gambling is primed to become the nation’s largest market. However, New York

UK and US Social Media Influencer Laws

UK and US Social Media Influencer Laws

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

In September of 2020, the United Kingdom’s (“UK”) Committee of Advertising Practice (“CAP”) reviewed the Instagram accounts of 122 UK-based social media influencers to determine whether content was being properly flagged as advertising in accordance with applicable social media influencer laws. This past March, the UK Advertising Standards Authority (“ASA”)

Running a Telemarketing Business?

Get a Free Compliance Review From an Experienced TCPA Lawyer.

Share on facebook
Share on google
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin