## Facts

- Adrian Abramovich operated a large-scale robocall campaign through Marketing Strategy Leaders, Inc. and Marketing Leaders, Inc.
- Over roughly three months in 2016, the campaign placed 96,758,223 prerecorded robocalls displaying misleading caller ID information.
- The calls used “neighbor spoofing,” showing local-looking numbers (matching the called party’s area code and prefix) to increase answer rates.
- When recipients answered, they heard prerecorded messages advertising “exclusive” or “limited time” vacation offers and suggesting affiliation with well-known travel and hospitality brands.
- Businesses whose names were invoked reported they had not authorized the calls and that consumers were misled about the call source and offer sponsor.
- A medical paging service reported high call volumes to its numbers, causing slowdowns and outages and creating public-safety risks for healthcare communications.
- The FCC investigated after receiving complaints from consumers and businesses, obtained carrier records, reviewed scripts, and analyzed a sample of 80,000 calls linked to the campaign.
- The FCC issued a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture under 47 U.S.C. § 503(b), asserting apparent violations of the Truth in Caller ID Act and implementing rules, and proposing a $120,000,000 forfeiture.

## Issues

1. Whether respondents apparently willfully and repeatedly violated the Truth in Caller ID Act and 47 C.F.R. § 64.1604 by knowingly causing transmission of misleading or inaccurate caller ID information with intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of value.
2. Whether a proposed $120,000,000 forfeiture was justified under the statutory and regulatory forfeiture framework given the scale, effects, and seriousness of the apparent misconduct.

## Decision

- The FCC found respondents apparently willfully and repeatedly violated 47 U.S.C. § 227(e) and 47 C.F.R. § 64.1604 by causing caller ID services to transmit misleading or inaccurate caller ID information.
- The FCC found the caller ID spoofing was performed with the requisite intent, based on the campaign’s volume, systematic local-number spoofing, and deceptive use of brand references to drive sales.
- The FCC concluded the conduct caused harm, including interference with critical communications infrastructure and risk to public safety.
- The FCC proposed a $120,000,000 forfeiture and provided respondents an opportunity to respond and seek reduction or cancellation.

## Legal Principles

- The Truth in Caller ID Act prohibits knowingly causing a caller identification service to transmit misleading or inaccurate caller ID information when done with intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of value.
- The FCC may infer the required intent from circumstantial evidence, including systematic spoofing methods, deceptive messaging, and the structure and scale of the operation.
- “Willful” under the Communications Act can be satisfied by conscious or deliberate acts and does not require a bad motive; “repeated” conduct may be shown by numerous violations over time.
- Forfeiture proposals under 47 U.S.C. § 503(b) may reflect the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the violation, including deterrence needs and risks to consumers and communications networks.

## Conclusion

The FCC determined that a massive neighbor-spoofing robocall operation apparently violated the Truth in Caller ID Act and FCC rules with the requisite intent and proposed a $120 million forfeiture based on the volume, deception, and harm to consumers and critical communications systems.


In re Adrian Abramovich, Marketing Strategy Leaders, Inc., & Marketing Leaders, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, 32 F.C.C.R. 5418 (2017)