Comment by djur
1 year ago
The controlling legislation here, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, prohibits initiating "any telephone call to any residential telephone line using an artificial or prerecorded voice to deliver a message without the prior express consent of the called party" (I got this quote directly from the FCC ruling). The legislation does not define "artificial or prerecorded voice". The FCC here is stating that they interpret "artificial voice" as including interactive AI voice agents, which did not exist in 1991. Do you think this is an unreasonable interpretation? Or should Congress be required to list exactly what technologies are prohibited in this context and update that list every time something new comes around?
In 1991 "artificial" probably meant something like "pre-recorded and re-cut". Which is basically AI voice generation, but at scale.
>Do you think this is an unreasonable interpretation? Or should Congress be required to list exactly what technologies are prohibited in this context and update that list every time something new comes around?
Not OP but this is the right question to ask. My answer is yes, congress is quite literally required to update statute to reflect modern technology (ensuring it conforms to the founding principles of course).
[dead]